In post 57, ZONEACE wrote:I never addressed you as town. I voted for you because you're were blatantly being not helpful and not scumhunting.
You OMGUS/revenge vote is just making me more secure in my decision
Here in my opinion, Zone establishes the tone of his cohesive ability. While addressing that he is voting bacde for his noncontributory play while other players in the game had made comments that are arguably just as "unhelpful".
His retaliatory comment about OMGUS exists just to create a buzz and an overall tonal stance toward bacde that he can follow for the time being allowing him to push bacde without any real effort on his part.
In post 59, ZONEACE wrote:Also, did you know that one day I one I'm just as happy lynching intentionally unhelpful townies as I am scum? So regardless of which one of them you are, I'm fine with my vote. You are acting in a way that seems scummy to me. If it's because you're scum, or just stupid I'm not sure, nor do I care all that much. Your actions stand in the way of a town win, so let's get rid of you.
As you can see the vitriolic nature he will use to address bacde is already present, creating a standoffish atmosphere that will segregate the town into either supporting his points or looking at bacde in an inherently unfavorable light. He defends his position with a vote that would suffice no matter the description, covering all of his bases before they even get attacked.
In post 152, ZONEACE wrote:you two seem to be having a lovely little circle today. Following, sheeping, buddying. It's all very adorable.
And giving me bad juju.
There is something there, but I'm not going to really commit to it!
But I'll prod the fires a little bit more...
A perfect example of the stance that Zone is taking in trying to divide the town. He is not really trying to discern the reasons for their actions, he is merely saying things in order to see if the town will take the bait and start to chew itself to pieces. His cohesive mentality isn't protown. His scumhunting is not existent and yet he is trying to say that his vote on bacde is for bacde's lack of scumhunting
In post 281, ZONEACE wrote:Nothing like some good old active non-participation to endear yourself to everyone.
More soft pokes by Zone in an attempt to try and spread town distrust.
One of the most psychological ways to make sure that the town is uncoordinated is to make the town not trust itself. By interjecting these little side comments and here and there, Zone is assuring that the town can't trust it because there are "scummy" things happening by everyone.
In post 490, ZONEACE wrote: In post 488, Smashbard wrote:TheTrollie: I'll be honest, I refuse to read anything you post as a counter point within quotations. You never did any of that in the Newbie Game we played together and Nachomamma thought you were guaranteed town. This vast change of playstyle makes me feel like you are scum trying to make your counter points as fluffy, hard to read and wordy as possible to make it seem like you are contributing when your scumhunting is a lot worse than it was in the Newbie Game we shared.
this is absolutely, unforgivably dumb (or stubborn, or both).
Again, instead of trying to help the town right itself and tell us why it is wrong for Smash to think these things he merely talks down to Smash, following the "tone" he established by calling his interactions with bacde earlier.
In post 528, ZONEACE wrote: In post 518, Bacde wrote:
Zoneace's argument was essentially "it doesn't matter if X is town or scum, we need to lynch X" which means if X flips town Zoneace could easily respond with "ah well it didn't matter his alignment anyway good lynch
Nice misrep. My argument was that the way you were playin early on, regardless of alignment, was bad for the town. In addition the interaction/shadowing/sheeping/buddying of smash read scum to me.
Now kindly hang.
In post 568, ZONEACE wrote: In post 561, Smashbard wrote:
Zoneace says Bacde is scum, guaranteed. He needs to be lynched today no matter what.
Another lazy missrep. You 2 are certainly sticking together in every way.
A classic defense of scum in my opinion to forgo explaining why things are not being interpreted correctly and goes on to kindle flames, almost approaching an argument. Once emotion comes into the game, people will lose focus of what they originally thought was scummy. It distracts people. That is Zone's ENTIRE goal with his play.
In post 622, ZONEACE wrote:I'm alive, I'm alive, I am so alive
vote
nothing has changed for me since yesterday, though I do reserve the right to vote Zeph at a later time (but I don't want to run up the wagon so quickly at the start of the day and cause a lynch before everyone has a chance to post today)
Interesting to note for later on. A possible back door? I don't know. Only time will tell.
In post 669, ZONEACE wrote:Maybe I’ve lost it at last
Maybe my last lucid moment has past
I’m dancing with death, I suppose.
But really, who knows?
what does this mean?
In post 671, ZONEACE wrote:
Let there be light.
Come on, Dad, let there be light.
You can't sit here in the dark for hours on end, it's just not right.
Let there be light.
Let there be light.
So, one of them can't kill? We had a successful block? Alternating night kills?
These two quotes in particular strike me as peculiar since it was Zone who called out my suspicion and the suspicion of NS as bad. While he sees that suspicion of NS is bad, he is willing to role-fish to the max? I am entertaining a few theories as to why Zone would do this, and the most logical ones are that Zone knows either 1) it is multiball, or 2) that NS is town but wants to fish a role out of NS BOTH of which imply scum knowledge and the questions seed themselves in scum motivation.
In post 673, ZONEACE wrote:
We'll sit right down together just like a family should
And eat and talk and laugh and joke my family and me
Its gonna be good gonna be good
Gonna be gonna be gonna be gonna be gonna be
Good good good good good good good good good good
Gonna be good, gonna be good
Gonna be good you'll see.
ok, right, No, i get that's a hunch. But based on fuck all as far as I can see. I see no indication from existing evidence that is something we need to be seriously considering. Unless you've picked up on something I've missed.
Role-fishing hardcore here meant to look like "casual" conversation.
In post 729, ZONEACE wrote:Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck.
This is fucking perfect!
Oh goodie, let's have a nothing poorly thought out/likely scum led shit-wagon on someone rather than actually being good mafia players and finding scum. Surely we'll win if we keep up this strategy.
This follows the cohesiveness principle I talked about earlier. The subconscious use of fuck and then the general negative comments are not to promote or foster a collective effort among the town. They are made to break down the morale and cause us to be disorganized.
In post 737, ZONEACE wrote: In post 735, Bacde wrote:@Smashbard are you forgetting about 1393?
Remember how slaandar and denisatp
HARD
-bussed Thor on d1? And got him lynched?
Yeah, pushing someone and having them flip maf doesn't make you confirmed town
Can you tell me what it is you're afraid of?
Can you tell me why I'm afraid it's me?
kinda like how you're about to hard bus smash after he threw out that awful NS vote?
Continuing that precedent set earlier in the game. Another scum tell in my book as scum do not want to have to adapt in anyway to the change in information or presentation of information and will entrench themselves in ideas established early in the game IF they are not drawing any attention. Which, until now, they were not.
A minor thing, but I noted this when it happened. I think this could be cognitive dissonance. I have him listed as a scum read but he doesn't deny it.
Only my town reads.
Zone makes more negative comments towards Smash and bacde continuing to follow their play as scum when to anyone looking in from an objective viewpoint... scum would not be making the moves that they are making. Smash ESPECIALLY. Zone is fighting hard to not lose the possibility of the Smash/bacde lynch by attacking MY reads on these two as town.
In post 815, ZONEACE wrote: In post 814, Oversoul wrote:VOTE: Zone
I am perfectly comfortable with this on an ethical and a logical level.
...........
Congratulations on this, it's super good.
Your 4th truly game relevant post (yes there are more about chicken's without heads and finding something on page 28, but only 4 have been actually substantive) out of 15 posts since you replaced in and it's a vote on me for adhoming. Just, really, really useful.
Particularly this specific post, his sarcasm subtly undermines the vote that I made against him already presenting my opinion in a negative light to those who are looking at it. Once more he establishes a negative attitude trying to attack my credibility as a player when I had just replaced in and was in the process of absorbing the information in the thread. concerning my play it doesn't take me very long to read the thread but to come to a conclusion based on the information I read it will take a while.
He uses attacks on my character and playstyle to suddenly devalue my vote on him.
