Unfortunately my time here is limited. So I will be quick. I'll just answer that which people seem to be waiting for me, so that you can proceed.
I was going to refine my case on Mollie, but I don't have time to do that, I will refer you to the posts in which I made the case:
Spoiler: Guille's Mollie Case
In post 438, guille2015 wrote:Ok, lets see what Pirate Mollie has been doing this game.
*I actually liked her vote on Levi starting the game. Here vote on Shrimp was bad though. Not only did she not let enough time for the effect of her Levi vote (pressure) to settle in, there was no followup on shrimp afterwards.
*Pointing out inconsistencies in PMs (66,71) is a strategy that both scum and town do. However, town don't usually make mistakes when pointing out inconsistencies. The blacksmith thing was is terminology from somewhere else and therefor irrelevant. Mollie makes tries to make it relevant.
*In post 124, reason to vote for Shrimp > OMGUS.
*The vote for Mantis in post 119 is iffy. I don't think that is a good reason to vote for someone. The worrysome part is that this goes uncontested for a while and Mollie wants other to vote for Mantis (154). The other part that I noticed was as follows:
In post 27, Adam-12 wrote:@Shrimp: So is your vote serious or not, I can't seem to tell...
If you read his vote post he at the same time mentions his vote as RVS in a playful manner & as a serious vote for a scum tell. I hold that as disingenuous voting where he can swing responsibility both ways. So, no not a useless question at all.
It looked like shrimp maybe voted molly just as a joke at first. but then, when it was brought to his attention that malakitten was actually serious about her vote on leviathan for not confirming right away, and then saw molly's post where she somewhat furthered the idea by asking mala if it was because she thought leviathan wanted more time in pre scum chat... then his vote turned to a serious one.
i don't know if that makes sense.
guess what i'm trying to say is that i don't find shrimp all that suspicious. and i am wondering about molly myself.
and why is this exactly??? in the 2 years we have been playing together the only time you try to leave me out to rot is when you are scum.
VOTE: mantis
I noticed that the highlighted text was placed there by Mollie. I don't particularly understand the intention.
*The deal between mantis and Mollie makes me think that it would be unlikely for them to be scum buddies. I can't tell who had the upper hand here.
*I think her vote for ProHawk is a stretch. She is consistent though. There is little explanation behind this one too. I can see where it came from though.
*Post 247 has reads. Changed her opinion of Mantis. Which is normal, but for reasons I don't see. All the reads are noncommittal.
*I like her post 250.
*Post 317 is a response to me. I guess you are saying that you think I'm scummy to unsure. Your not really giving me much to work with. Let's see. I found this extremely funny:
In post 139, pirate mollie wrote:this is your first decent question so far and it also contradicts question #2 since obviously I do not OMGUS and automatically get sus of whoever votes me!
it is a
gut
read but I did like his "are you the watcher or tracker immune ack ack ack" post. it looks town motivated to me.
In post 151, pirate mollie wrote:...pretty sure hawk boy is town and thinking mantis is scum. it isn't based on
gut
like you tried to insinuate it was more that his "ack ack are watcher or tracker immune?" question...
In post 317, pirate mollie wrote:there is a whole thread where surely you can come up with something better than "oh I think she is scum cos of a
gut
feeling", lol. you can pull when there has been a lynch or 2 but to pull that at the start of the game is pretty lame.
*Post 318 you agree with me about Adam's Loaded questions thing. Makes me wonder. When I ISOed him, the loaded question thing was less severe than I previously thought.
I'm going to stop here. I'll continue this tomorrow with the Prohawk vs Mollie thing, Which I have to pay much closer attention than I can at this moment. In general, all those points are minor really. I've read her with a very critical and biased eye. The conjunction of everything is what gives me the gut feeling. I kinda understand it though. Will finish up tomorrow. I think I know were my vote will go tomorrow.
*In post 326, Noted overreaction to Prohawk's test. I can believe that Prohawk was in fact testing. He already had a vote on me so he didn't have the hammer. In which case, it doesn't feel like retrofitting a solution.
*Post 328: "^eta: also I can't think of a protown reason to keep levi in the game the only people who will want him around are scum." I disagree with this. If Levi is a weak link, mafia will indeed keep him in the game. But in this case, he is considered town. If he is town, then scum got no reason to leave him to the end or they will lose.
*I find nothing productive in the Mollie vs Shrimp discussion. Mollie finds that being defensive is scummy yet she is being defensive from shrimp.
*In 415 she says the most interesting thing: "I don't like how adam is treating me as town but is okay with my lynch". She defends this in post 423 but I absolutely don't see it. Her examples are places were Adam asks for Mollies reads and opinions. This is standard play, IMO. In fact, it strengthens Adam as a townish player. Asking reads and opinions from you means that he is trying to get a better strength in your allignment. If it happens that you flip town, we would have a wealth of information to help us find scum, something that you have been adamant about in favoring.
I'm getting tired of this. This is an Ad hominem, and it's not the first. If his arguments are stupid, please point them out and say why.
@Pirate Mollie
: The only other game that you used the word Grooming was the Newbie 1286 game. I don't want to read through it, can you give me a summary of where that got you, considering you were town in that game.
Also:
@Pirate Mollie
: Rather than saying that my posts are indicative of being scum, feel free to explain why you feel that way because I just don't see it.
Conclusion: Adam has the best case on Mollie, and I agree with him. She is inconsistent. She overreacts to certain accusations and her OMGUS is off the charts.
Vote Pirate Mollie
Basically, inconsistencies, overreactions, and OMGUS. Plus I noticed a couple of times in which she used an argument somebody found on another person to attack that person. Additionally, Adam's case on her also helped me with my vote.
@Mala: Basically if Thor is scum. I would expect that you are his Buddy. I don't think you will bus in this game as scum. Not many players would hardcore bus in this game. That said, if you are scum then your scum buddy is someone that has not received serious votes from you. By serious I mean with the intent to hammer.
I have to reread the last 5 pages again. I read them too fast for my own good. Thor is doing a good job at replacing someone. Doesn't mean he is not scum, just that if I analyze him alone, I can't tell.
Shrimp is Likely town
. at the very least if Thor flips scum, shrimp is not his partner.
. Ok, after writting that it shrimp scum would have made the same mistake if Thor is town. I would like to here what mala has to say, sorry if my information is less than what you expected. I'll review the last pages tomorrow. Oh, And I have the feeling that Prohawk is town. So I don't endorse his lynch.
If overreactions and OMGUS were actual scum tells then that case would impress me.
You have proven that Mollie is an emotional player - color me shocked.
When you read the pages and feel comfortable enough to not soft sell your opinions we'll talk.
@Bork - literally no one else has expressed scum feelings towards Mantis. You either need to start screaming and present a succinct and compelling case, or move to your #2.
@Mala - you are #2 after me or ProHawk in most player's minds. You should do something about that. Hint: no one is interested in lynching Levi, I think that I was the only other one even calling him scummy, and I'm now calling him town. Work on that.
@Leviathan - stop being useless, pick a wagon.
@Guille - after your read to verify your thoughts, you also need to pick a wagon. Considering your reads - me or Mala seems the only slightly sensible ones.
We have 7 days till deadline.
Hint: You'll want a claim to happen 3-4 days before deadline so you have time to discuss it.
@thor I really don't want to pick a wagon. It doesn't make me useless not too. i personally naturally feel neither of you are scum unless I go by how mollie played. Yes, she seemed very emotional. Is playing mafia and having emotional points scummy though? i don't want to lynch thor this first day unless really thats what others want. as for prohawk i'm not necessarily to keen on lynching him even though you seem to be painting him in a very scummy light for going at odds with you. just because two people fight doesn't mean one is scum. town can get frustrated too.
Levi, what part of stop being useless didn't you get? If you want to lynch Shrimp, then vote him, although Shrimp isn't a wagon so in terms of being a contributory vote it wouldn't, but you still have 7 days to make a convincing argument right?
I see by not voting shrimp if is a pointless thing that it is in fact NOT being useless. or unless you just agree that I shouldn't be useless and therefore not care about my vote and just put it on someone I think is most likely to be lynched. Do y'all agree I should do that? if so, then I will! I will only want to lynch the person that I feel I can make the lynch go through. that makes SO MUCH SENSE when trying to find scum. and also I didn't see shrimp's saying that he had a problem couldn't get on. he hasn't posted in a while so I wanted to give him a chance to post again before I made my decision on the matter. but maybe I should just lynch someone because someone else told me too without thinking it through...hmmm....i have so many choices at the moment...
can I help it that I want to be actually right and so i'm having a hard time making that decision? I don't want to vote someone because of other people's reasons and then have you suddenly believe i'm scum for following someone's reasoning and not my own. i've seen that happen too many times and i even haven't played this game that long.
@thor it doesn't make me useless because I ACTUALLY want to help town by NOT being wrong. I know day 1 may be a hard decision to lynch but still i'd rather really really think things through then just be quick about my guess of who I should lynch and stick with it the entire first day. if that was the case I'd have decided to lynch shrimp a long time ago. he redeemed himself to me a bit and then became even more scummy to me and he hasn't been around to state his opinion on the game or add his input. another thing I see as scummy. but I want him to return before I vote him.
1. I wouldn't have any issue with this if you had your own reasoning and were following it. If you're too scared of being wrong to place a vte then you may want to replace out - because very few votes in mafia are a sure thing.
2. Wanting to be right does not help us. We all want to be right - it's making decisions and stating opinions and performing actions that will help us actually be right.
VOTE: shrimp fine. It is what my gut tells me at the moment. I didn't like his game in the beginning. His arguments seemed flawed and have always seemed a bit flawed compared to everyone's elses arguments. he redeemed himself a bit but then I felt he backtracked overall from that. then he disappeared completely. apart from seeming useless at the moment. I don't see much pro-town play in him.
In post 1104, Thor665 wrote:And dear lord, if I'd said 'your points are valid yet wrong' I would have been town?
Hint: his points *were* invalid, and I showed that to be the case, so...
No. The point is they are
potentially
invalid and there is clear reason as to why they CAN be valid but you are declaring them completely invalid and using it as a bad reason to push a case. Its basically OMGUS and its ott.
Overall, she pushed bad cases with bad logic, overreacted in the thread is various ways & lied/obfuscated:
Bad push on Hawk for probing Guille
-- not an action of sincere town and shows desperation to relieve her wagon
Bad push on Hawk with crappy logic about "blending in"
-- insincere/desperation
Terrible vote of Levi on semantics "those of us who are scum"
-- insincere/desperation
Overly self-conscious RVS justification of her BW vote
-- a potential indicator of a scum mind
Terrible "scum perfume" defense which she could not properly support and was a lie
-- why lie in her defense?
Terrible deflection on Levi being an easy lynch
-- why obfuscate in her defense in the face of a clear truth?
Overreaction on a Guille unexplained "gut read" before it had any solidity
-- why overreact on a gut read?
These are symptoms that something is not right. She isn't a newb and yet she is playing so badly and I think the reasons are is because she was overly self-conscious scum. She clearly doesn't believe what she is saying in many of the above examples which is the basis of all scum hunting -- town doesn't need to lie. I submit she is the scummiest player in this thread.
Look, even Mantis noticed her odd play and when she questioned her about it she reacted even more oddly.
Her replace out at least potentially proved that her lylo-martyr logic was a lie and is again another symptom that something is wrong; yes it could of been sincere as town but with her overall bad play, I just don't believe it. I think it was scum bailing on a lost cause.
invalid and there is clear reason as to why they CAN be valid but you are declaring them completely invalid and using it as a bad reason to push a case. Its basically OMGUS and its ott.
His point was that only scum would replace out at L-1.
I told him that was invalid and proved it as such.
I was actually the one stating the less extreme standpoint.
Derp.
In post 1137, Adam-12 wrote:These are symptoms that something is not right. She isn't a newb and yet she is playing so badly and I think the reasons are is because she was overly self-conscious scum. She clearly doesn't believe what she is saying in many of the above examples which is the basis of all scum hunting -- town doesn't need to lie. I submit she is the scummiest player in this thread.
Have you ever been town in a game and had literally everything you did called into question and called a lie or scummy?
If you have then I think you understand the pressure that exists there. Now, whether or not that pressure would affect you - do you think it would affect Mollie, a player we've already proven plays emotionally?
Congrats, you proved she doesn't have flawless logic in her scumtells (shock - she plays emotionally) and have also proved that she can be flustered.
I would submit she does that less as scum - go check out this game: http://www.quicktopic.com/48/H/9GN4yrhCaUvR
Note that I catch her with bad logic...and she REFUSES TO DISCUSS IT. (relevant stuff is around halfway through Day 1 if you track down the Day 1 archive audio, or you can listen to Day 2 where I'm discussing it with her)
That's rather different than what she did here, innit?
Wonder why...
also mantis you need to get in here so I can get a read on you!!!
You tell me how I am spinning it, cause i'm not. Her posts themselves did not garner any negative attention until specific scrutiny was brought to them.
RE: Scum looking up another game for an argument. It is more than possible.
wrt the bold: erm no, spinning is trying to misinterpret a motivation and paint it as scummy when it isn't. <---- it looks scummy IMO.
In post 758, ProHawk wrote:If I am spinning it, why can't you point out exactly what/where the spin is?
1) Mantis never once stated that Mollie gets flustered while playing
2a) From her description of herself and opening in this game I would not expect her to be a player that gets flustered
2b) I do think that she did exhibit behavior along the lines of nervous/manipulative scum from the very beginning of this game
3) I would like to see Mantis weigh in on this
1. Okay...I never said she did.
2a. And yet she clearly became flustered this game, so obviously your conclusion is wrong unless you're saying she faked it.
2b. Nervous is not scummy - nervous is playstyle. I disagree that she was manipulative.
3. Sure.
In post 1141, ProHawk wrote:wrt my bold: you are spinning this. I drew negative attention at my entrance into the thread which you voted on didn't you?
You then asked her how it was spinning.
She then specifically described what spinning was and that you had done it.
I think it was pretty obvious she was out to manipulate Mantis' read of herself, she started it from her very first post and just about everyone noticed how weak her initial meta read of Mantis was & how it suddenly changed 180 degrees with no explanation other than an unexplained "meta". Her buddying manipulation can also been seen in her deflection/misdirection post with Mantis that I have oft quoted.
This IS a profile of what looks like manipulation to me.
In post 1146, Adam-12 wrote:I think it was pretty obvious she was out to manipulate Mantis' read of herself, she started it from her very first post and just about everyone noticed how weak her initial meta read of Mantis was & how it suddenly changed 180 degrees with no explanation other than an unexplained "meta". Her buddying manipulation can also been seen in her deflection/misdirection post with Mantis that I have oft quoted.
This IS a profile of what looks like manipulation to me.
Counterpoint: She actually had meta of Mantis because they play together and are aware of each other's meta and that's half the reason you want Mantis to weigh in with thoughts on Mollie. If Mantis has insight to Mollie than obviously the reverse is also likely true.
:Shrug:
In post 1147, Adam-12 wrote:Also lets not forget her point here, she was pushing that crappy "blending in" theory right?
My awareness is she brought up the 'blending in' thing as a specific call against ProHawk, up until he introduced it as a concept I'm unaware of her angling her defense on that point. Am I wrong?
