Mini Normal 1879 Bringer Mafia II [Game Over]

[Terata]

It's not your level of participation. I'd be a hypocrite for calling out a lurker just for lurking. The problem with you is that you show up and offer nothing

but an attack on another lurker/quasi-lurker.

It looks like you're avoiding conflict intentionally.

Calling absolute bull on this one. Show me the receipts.

The only person I've "attacked" for filler so far has been Gerroat. I quoted all of WhemeStar's initial posts to prove against their statement that they already explained their vote against Hawk in the first couple of pages—which they really didn't.

Also, the bold text in your quote suggests you see me as a lurker. Care to elaborate on that? Since I've been added as a replacement I've been on top of this game fully.

Now about avoiding conflict, I have two responses to that:

• I'm not. I don't exactly see how calling out two players (Fro99er, Naomi) for their play styles and persisting that a player justifies their vote (WhemeStar) constitutes "avoiding conflict."
  
  
• If I was, what exactly would your point be? Avoiding conflict isn't necessarily a bad thing, particularly this early in the game. Right now we're still about deliberation and facilitating discussion. I don't have to be going at people like Fro99er is Cooperative Sheep to advance the game in this stage.

Okay,

now

I'm really leaving for the day. Just had to respond to that one.

this is not a towny response to pressure. Strong emotion without really wolf reading him, just wanting to prove him wrong and get him on another path. This last sentence especially shows he was just

responding

, and not doing anything active in terms of solving the player he lashed out on. Simple defense isn't really something towns get super engaged in unless they're really forced to IME, and even in that they constantly consider the pushing person's alignment more than i see this post doing.

[Fro99er]

@Fro99er you and I have got to play more.

I agree!

[Terata]

Here's my big case-y-wall-case thing. I hate walls for the most part, so this makes me a "giant fucking hypocrite" (remember that phrase)

There's several problems I have with Chaos' play so far. Some are more meta-based, but some are more evidence based in this game.

Chaos opens up in 54 voting Wheme, and asking him what he thinks about my pressure on sheep. It strikes me as odd. Why specifically ask Wheme, and why specifically about my pressure on sheep? I get that my pressure on sheep was the big thing happening at the time, but chaos doesn't give his own thoughts on it because, as he replies to me in 59 "I don't think they'd be super helpful." Yet he expects Wheme's thoughts to be super helpful or something?

Also, Chaos mentions he's not about the sheep wagon, but does not state why. It's an attempt to disrail the wagon without having to put in the work of doing so.

In 59, chaos continues

So, frog is town for the push on Sheep. This would lead me to think that you think his reasoning is good/genuine/some other good words. If this is the case, why be suspicious of other people agreeing and why townread Sheep? If this is not the case, why townread frogger?

He pressures Wheme about why wheme is suspicious of people sheeping me on sheep, the townread on sheep, and the townread on me, as if it's some sort of contradiction. But Wheme actually replies in 63

I think the push on sheep is weak, and frog made it seem like it was strong to get reactions out of everyone

That's a fair response, and jives with how he could see both sheep and myself as town, yet suspect others on the sheep wagon.

But here's where chaos gets manipulative. In post 109 Chaos asks me for my take on my own push on Sheep. Chaos has played with me twice before, once in my perfect scum win in BEES, and once in our perfect town win in MAFIACEPTION. So he knows I don't fuck around with my pushes. So I give my take that I'm serious about my push (which Chaos knew from meta, and if he's scum he also knows I'm town making a genuine push).

(I'll have more to say about 109 in a minute, but I want to continue on this line of thought around Wheme)

In 282 Chaos says

I assumed your push was genuine, and it seems like I was right.

He confirms he knew that my push was genuine, so this is clearly an attempt to turn this around on either Wheme or myself, which he does later in the same post

So this (wheme's post 63) has been proven wrong. frogger believes the strength of his push on Sheep. Since you think the push is weak, does this change your read of frogger at all?

This is manipulative because if Wheme answers "yes, my read has changed so now I read frog as scum" or if wheme answers "No" then Chaos can come back with "then your original reason for townreading frogger for a weak push on sheep was a lie, because you townread him anyway". Manipulative as hell. It pushes the suspicion elsewhere, while chaos doesn't actually do any work around the sheep wagon himself.

Here's where I come back to chaos' post 109. He answer's Naomi's question to him with a combo of 1 and 3, meaning a combo of "I don't think sheep slipped" and "I don't have strong feelings on sheep." My issue is he's expecting everyone else to have feelings around myself and sheep, yet he can't provide any himself. He just want to create Chaos (pun intended) around the sheep/frog thing, while sidelining what he thinks of me and sheep himself.

There's also the "slip" stuff which Gerry pointed out and I agreed with, and Chaos actively defended against. That was a second,more indirect attempt at derailing the sheep wagon. We disagree about the slip, and this argument won't get us anywhere, but I don't believe this gels with my meta of Chaos using the slip in MAFIACEPTION, even if he says its different. I was town there, and I'm town here, and I still like to push possible slips when I see its possible there was one. For chaos to dismiss it so quickly, given what he did in MAFIACEPTION and how easy it was for other scum to dismiss it so quickly, is just another little point.

The clincher is his post 341 where he accuses Terata of doing the same thing he did around questioning Wheme. Yes, terata did question Wheme, about the exact same thing, and Terata even called Chaos out in 283 for saying Chaos' post where he then pushes back on Wheme now that I've said my push on sheep was real. But the difference is in their tone. It's going to sound really fucking dumb, but the tone of how chaos did it vs. the tone in which Terata did it is miles apart. Here's the difference:

Chaos:

So this has been proven wrong. frogger believes the strength of his push on Sheep. Since you think the push is weak, does this change your read of frogger at all?

Terata:

Wheme, you said early you liked Frog for overblowing the "weak" (as you called it) push on Sheep and searching for reactions. Did your read on Frogg change anything when you got to know Frogg's push was geniune and not simply a push for reactions. As you said he's still a townread i would assume no? so did he do something else you liked or did it still deserve a townread from you for pushing something you called "weak"?

Terata asks hers in a way that uses lighter, less accusatory tone for example "when you got to know Frogg's push was genuine" (use of the word genuine), "As you said he's still a townread i would assume no?" (benefit of the doubt), "so did he do something else you liked or did it still deserve a townread from you" (gives Wheme the option of still townreading me for something else, deserve a townread is a much more engaging tone).

Chaos was "So this has been proven wrong" (Wheme was wrong), "does this change your read of frogger at all?" (comapared to terata's does frog still deserve a townread and maybe are there other reasons)

IDK...it's just tone. I don't really remember Chaos taking this tone in BEES or MAFIACEPTION as town, but that's speculation on my part until I re-read.

Finally, he then accuses terata of being either scum or bad town at the end of his post 341 because she did the same thing he did. But I really find it scummy when someone is like "oh you accused me of this and then you did it yourself so you are a hypocrite." NEWSFLASH: town can be hypocrites. Happens all the damn time. And it's a really easy point for scum to latch on to, because they don't have to do any work. Just yell HYPOCRITE at the top of their lungs. As Chaos basically did with

this would make you seem like a giant fucking hypocrite

i read this before responding to his outlash and im glad for that, so i don't have to reiterate so much. Good post.

What i again don't like with his way of responding is that he lashes out hard with logic to condemn me and still ends up with the conclusion of "bad town or scum", which is basically still saying absolutely 0 about my alignment. Scum tends to do that, lashing out in an attempt to defend themselves without really trying to determine the alignment of the one who accuses them. I feel really good about Chaos being scum right now, and i don't usually feel good about my scum reads d1. FeelsGoodMan

[Terata]

Also i love how i accused him of trying to catch people in contradictions and how it was wolfy, and he presents another example of exactly that. Thanks for outing

[Terata]

Towns:

Frogg
AJ

Naomi
Lil Uzi Vert

PenguinPower

Null:

Lowell
gerry
WhemeStar
Sheep

Scum

Hawk
ECMitchell

ChaosOmega

[Firebringer]

MariaR is now backup mod.
This likely won't have any impact on game though because I am an amazing mod.

[Terata]

MariaR is now backup mod.
This likely won't have any impact on game though because I am an amazing mod.

perfect*

[Terata]

Towns:

Frogg
AJ

Naomi
Lil Uzi Vert

PenguinPower

Null:

Lowell
gerry
WhemeStar
Sheep

Scum

Hawk
ECMitchell

ChaosOmega

actually my towns looks a bit different

Frogg

Lil
Naomi

AJ

[MariaR]

Hello I Maria will be your backup mod incase little fire gets sick enjoy

[Fro99er]

Hawk-Lowell and Chaos-Sheep have both shown patterns of following each other a bit more than I'd be comfortable with thus far.

there's definitely something weird going on in those four. But in the case of a lowell/hawk scumpair, this would have to then be a bus.

65- hawk calls lil suspicious because he was "the last one to vote [sheep]" [-, what??]
76- AJ calls out hawk for being chicken [+]
213- AJ calls out hawk again [+, yep]
222- frogger joins hawk-wagon [+]
293- sheep and hawk lead with three votes
315- wheme calls hawk scum for jumping on "weak" sheep wagon [-, why weak?]

Some scums:

fos hawk

The way he talks in 65 and 75 he takes as given that sheep is not scum and the wagon on him was serving some other purpose than to lynch scum. But why? I notice he's not the only one to do this (Naomi does as well), but the fact that he doesn't even consider the leading wagon could be scum (or is even serious) reads like he already knows the answer.

I guess it's possible.

I also have this alternative gamestate where both Chaos and Hawk are scum, but I need to dig into that more.

[Fro99er]

Hawk:

Hawk: Do you currently have a scumread of Sheep?

At the time I was leaning him yespecially. Now yeah pretty much since all his posts till now have been the definition of insanity.

Is LUV still a bigger scumread for you at this point?

After that I'd like to point out all the problems I have with sheep and frogs argument that's spanned all day today and added 5 pages of fluff.

In your short readlist before this, you said frog was town and Sheep was scummy.

Does frog not gain suspicion for being a main contributor to what you called "5 pages of fluff"?

Actually maybe not on the chaos hawk thing. Found this (bolded mine). MORE manipulation by Chaos.

[Firebringer]

Hawk has been prodded.
Reminder to players, prods go out if you haven't posted in 36 hours instead of normal 48 hours.

[Terata]

games here are so slow, i feel weird about having close to no content

[Fro99er]

Fire moves up my mod ranks for having faster paced games than the norm.

[Fro99er]

Mod ranks:

Varsoon-Marquis-Glork
Fire

Everyone else

[WhemeStar]

games here are so slow, i feel weird about having close to no content

My first newbie game was slow, not used to having more content

[Naomi-Tan]

Well least Lowells last post has helped me get a read on them.

Lets start before it though back at

@Fro99, you don't need to defend my honor. But seriously thanks for defending my honor.

VOTE: sheep

Is the slip real? Who knows? Am I going to laugh if the sheep flips scum? You bet!

As people may remember at the time I found this suspicious however, I entirely forget about it until this last post where I ISO'd back to see more about what they've done as they triggered red flags. As though it could be seen how I saw it I understood others views too. but then the're next post is this long one. Which I'll now break down

First section is a much of posts with one line comments. this makes it hard to track but given the sheer quantity of posts Its forgivable. What is NOT good is how its designed giving a + or - rating to certain posts. To me green members have no issues keeping track of who they think is green and being influenced, while red members have a harder time faking it as they have to emulate looking for greens. One way to elumate would be to assign a score or rating system like the one seen here. Though it could be green trying to keep track of stuff there is some things said that ping me as entirely wrong. for example they cover my wall of posts and say at the end

274- naomi post-walls, has NO scum candidates [-, weak]

Now saying 'posts walls' as a negative towards someone is dumb as it encourages less discussion. but that doesn't appear to me to be their central issue and then there is the clear misrep

Redish

Lowell - Unchanged from last time. I don't / can't remember anything they've said since then.

here you can see despite them saying I had no red read. I certainly did. It was a slight one on them

I'm going to skip the bits that don't tackle myself for a moment as those people may comment on their own and conflict is a good way to get reads and I'd like to see the actions of the parties in question. Moving onto;

fos naomi
Maybe someone is going to jump in and tell me there's a meta I'm missing, but to post so many times and not have any scumreads is just bad. I think she's at least partially playing up the "omg I can't decide, it's so hard to find scum!" angle to avoid having to take a stance.

Okay so lets start with this part;

I think she's at least partially playing up the "omg I can't decide, it's so hard to find scum!" angle to avoid having to take a stance.

Okay so the obvious thing I can say to this. is your first half contradicts your second half.

to post so many times and not have any scumreads is just bad.

Says I posted a lot. now given they are admiting I posted a lot and suspecting me It would appear to me that they would of commented on lack of content however, they have not stated that at all. Which says to me they have seen content and me taking a stance. Now I could go back and make a quote wall on me taking stances but I'll just post link instead.

My thoughts on the slip presented by garry and everyone on it.
89 91

My thoughts on everyone;
101

My thoughts on Blank votes/read lists;
87 93

Question requests.
97 108

There are more but I think I made my case. considering this was my first post 'batch' Many stances was taken. Which leads me to the final reason why I think this post is red as heck

The disconnect between the top and second sections.

In the top section Im mentioned twice firstly;
[quote="In post 355, "Lowell"]80s-90s- Ter and naomi banter [ter looks bad, naomi looks good][/quote]
secondly;
[quote="In post 355, "Lowell"]274- naomi post-walls, has NO scum candidates [-, weak][/quote]

So the first one says I look good. while the second says I look bad but with only a weak read. Which if you use basic maths puts me somewhere between null and +0.5 (If weak is -0.5 and good was +1 it would make +0.5) if there equal it would be 1-1=0 so... theortically on bottom section would reflect a null slight greenish lean. which it doesn't and has me squarely FoS'd

Then we can examine Ter. (why Ter? because I Green read them enough to use them as a second green) In the top section for ter we have two negatives and a positive making a slight negative. yet they entirely revise their position on the matter in the bottom half.

Then we get rail roading. Where chaos is concerned. where in the top everything is a negative and their even giving points to ter for voting them and then their is this post 282 within this post Chaos is obviously not defending sheep rather digging into people to try and game solve. this wouldn't line up with your own statement of only defending sheep. and

Regardless of me yelling at Terata, I do want this answered, WhemeStar. Why is frog town for pushing a weak case when you scumread other people for jumping on the wagon?

where is is obviously digging what he believes is a red who has accidently said one thing and then something else that contridcts it. saying that.

VOTE: Lowell Key reasons for the vote;
• Opportunistic vote on the sheep wagon
• disinterest in weather or not their vote on sheep was town
• Misrepresentation of facts to make people appear more red than they are
• Contractions within a post multiple times disconnecting two sections.

[ChaosOmega]

Chaos opens up in 54 voting Wheme, and asking him what he thinks about my pressure on sheep. It strikes me as odd. Why specifically ask Wheme, and why specifically about my pressure on sheep? I get that my pressure on sheep was the big thing happening at the time, but chaos doesn't give his own thoughts on it because, as he replies to me in 59 "I don't think they'd be super helpful." Yet he expects Wheme's thoughts to be super helpful or something?

So you get that your pressure on Sheep was the big thing happening, and want to ask me why I chose that particular thing? K. I targeted Wheme with that questioning because they had made multiple posts during the wagon buildup that were fluff and unrelated to it; I wanted them to take a stand on an issue and see if their lack of mentioning the wagon was scum hoping to ignore it for a while and see where it goes. I know I'm town, I'm not trying to scumhunt myself, so yeah, Wheme's thoughts on it are much more interesting to me.

Also, Chaos mentions he's not about the sheep wagon, but does not state why. It's an attempt to disrail the wagon without having to put in the work of doing so.

Derail, not disrail. Also, I'm not derailing shit by saying I'm lukewarm to the wagon. "Oh, this player that said two things all game said he doesn't like this wagon and gives no reasoning, we better back off." Also, you want to paint derailing the Sheep wagon here as bad. Do you know that Sheep is scum? Or is it that derailing a wagon by putting work into it is good, but not putting in work means it's scummy? Please clarify the issue here.

In 59, chaos continues

So, frog is town for the push on Sheep. This would lead me to think that you think his reasoning is good/genuine/some other good words. If this is the case, why be suspicious of other people agreeing and why townread Sheep? If this is not the case, why townread frogger?

He pressures Wheme about why wheme is suspicious of people sheeping me on sheep, the townread on sheep, and the townread on me, as if it's some sort of contradiction. But Wheme actually replies in 63

I think the push on sheep is weak, and frog made it seem like it was strong to get reactions out of everyone

That's a fair response, and jives with how he could see both sheep and myself as town, yet suspect others on the sheep wagon.

It does jive, I agree. But I knew that his foundation was flawed (i.e., you making your push seem stronger than it is to get reactions), so I ask a follow-up, or as you like to call it, being manipulative.

But here's where chaos gets manipulative. In post 109 Chaos asks me for my take on my own push on Sheep. Chaos has played with me twice before, once in my perfect scum win in BEES, and once in our perfect town win in MAFIACEPTION. So he knows I don't fuck around with my pushes. So I give my take that I'm serious about my push (which Chaos knew from meta, and if he's scum he also knows I'm town making a genuine push).

(I'll have more to say about 109 in a minute, but I want to continue on this line of thought around Wheme)

In 282 Chaos says

I assumed your push was genuine, and it seems like I was right.

He confirms he knew that my push was genuine, so this is clearly an attempt to turn this around on either Wheme or myself, which he does later in the same post

So this (wheme's post 63) has been proven wrong. frogger believes the strength of his push on Sheep. Since you think the push is weak, does this change your read of frogger at all?

This is manipulative because if Wheme answers "yes, my read has changed so now I read frog as scum" or if wheme answers "No" then Chaos can come back with "then your original reason for townreading frogger for a weak push on sheep was a lie, because you townread him anyway". Manipulative as hell. It pushes the suspicion elsewhere, while chaos doesn't actually do any work around the sheep wagon himself.

Yes, I knew your push was genuine. Without this step, I could have asked Wheme "Hey, frogger's push is genuine, so now what do you think", and he could justifiably go "How the fuck do you know what frogger's push is supposed to be?" With you clarifying, I now have evidence of it. Didn't think I'd have to explain that, but here we are.

I don't know why you're painting my question here to Wheme as a dichotomy. Is it to make me look worse? Because I asked, given this information he didn't have before, if his read has changed at all. There's a range of options, and I wanted to see how he would re-evaluate his read given one of his premises was wrong. You made plenty of other posts after the early push on Sheep, it's not as if he has to scumread you if his position changes here. I was more looking for any sort of progression from Wheme's earlier reads, since he looks like he established some early and is fitting his play around those early reads to stay consistent and isn't actually scumhunting.

And why do you keep bringing up the fucking Sheep wagon? He is not in my top 3 scumreads currently, and I'm not interested in pursuing it. So why the fuck would I do any work around the wagon?

Here's where I come back to chaos' post 109. He answer's Naomi's question to him with a combo of 1 and 3, meaning a combo of "I don't think sheep slipped" and "I don't have strong feelings on sheep." My issue is he's expecting everyone else to have feelings around myself and sheep, yet he can't provide any himself. He just want to create Chaos (pun intended) around the sheep/frog thing, while sidelining what he thinks of me and sheep himself.

I'm expecting everyone to? Did I fucking ask everyone? Also, I asked what Wheme thought of the wagon. You know what he could have answered? I'll give you a hint, he could have said the same thing as me. So this point is total fucking nonsense.

There's also the "slip" stuff which Gerry pointed out and I agreed with, and Chaos actively defended against. That was a second,more indirect attempt at derailing the sheep wagon. We disagree about the slip, and this argument won't get us anywhere, but I don't believe this gels with my meta of Chaos using the slip in MAFIACEPTION, even if he says its different. I was town there, and I'm town here, and I still like to push possible slips when I see its possible there was one. For chaos to dismiss it so quickly, given what he did in MAFIACEPTION and how easy it was for other scum to dismiss it so quickly, is just another little point.

I dismissed it because I think the slip is garbage. Think whatever you like about it, but I personally think it's an absolutely lousy point. It's semantics and parsing.

The clincher is his post 341 where he accuses Terata of doing the same thing he did around questioning Wheme. Yes, terata did question Wheme, about the exact same thing, and Terata even called Chaos out in 283 for saying Chaos' post where he then pushes back on Wheme now that I've said my push on sheep was real. But the difference is in their tone. It's going to sound really fucking dumb, but the tone of how chaos did it vs. the tone in which Terata did it is miles apart. Here's the difference:

Chaos:

So this has been proven wrong. frogger believes the strength of his push on Sheep. Since you think the push is weak, does this change your read of frogger at all?

Terata:

Wheme, you said early you liked Frog for overblowing the "weak" (as you called it) push on Sheep and searching for reactions. Did your read on Frogg change anything when you got to know Frogg's push was geniune and not simply a push for reactions. As you said he's still a townread i would assume no? so did he do something else you liked or did it still deserve a townread from you for pushing something you called "weak"?

Terata asks hers in a way that uses lighter, less accusatory tone for example "when you got to know Frogg's push was genuine" (use of the word genuine), "As you said he's still a townread i would assume no?" (benefit of the doubt), "so did he do something else you liked or did it still deserve a townread from you" (gives Wheme the option of still townreading me for something else, deserve a townread is a much more engaging tone).

Chaos was "So this has been proven wrong" (Wheme was wrong), "does this change your read of frogger at all?" (comapared to terata's does frog still deserve a townread and maybe are there other reasons)

IDK...it's just tone. I don't really remember Chaos taking this tone in BEES or MAFIACEPTION as town, but that's speculation on my part until I re-read.

You're right, this does sound really fucking dumb. I asked if it changed his read. It's not manipulative, it's not me fucking cornering him, he established a townread on you partially based on something that was later proven to be false. I want to know with that new information, if anything changed. I'm sorry I didn't fucking say please or give him the benefit of the doubt or use the fucking words you would prefer. I asked if it changed.

Hawk:

Hawk: Do you currently have a scumread of Sheep?

At the time I was leaning him yespecially. Now yeah pretty much since all his posts till now have been the definition of insanity.

Is LUV still a bigger scumread for you at this point?

After that I'd like to point out all the problems I have with sheep and frogs argument that's spanned all day today and added 5 pages of fluff.

In your short readlist before this, you said frog was town and Sheep was scummy.

Does frog not gain suspicion for being a main contributor to what you called "5 pages of fluff"?

Actually maybe not on the chaos hawk thing. Found this (bolded mine). MORE manipulation by Chaos.

This is not manipulation, holy shit.

Let's have a chat here for a sec, fro99er. Let's assume you're town. If you are, and with this playerlist, you become the town leader by default. Still assuming you're town, scum will want to keep out of your way. Speaking of this point, a quote:

No. I'm not talking about WK

Ok, ill try not to ask anymore questions since you in a previous post said you don't like answering them.

The appeasement here is pathetic. They're not trying to suss you out, they're trying to stay out of your way. Dash of WIFOM for you, if I'm scum here with you being town, I do not bother to keep engaging people about their town read of you. Because in a certain light, it might seem like I'm throwing shit on you. I'm trying to see who is scared of you vs. who is trying to read you. I would not mention you much if at all, and I would kill you N1.

You're one of the very few people in this playerlist whom I respect the play of, I'm trying to level with you here. You think my tone this game is different, look at how I cased Poro in Mafiaception. If I'm confident in a push, I do not give benefit of the doubt, and I don't word things just the way you prefer. And I'm not fucking manipulating players, I'm asking them questions.

[Naomi-Tan]

@MOD: Please fix the broken quote in their

[Terata]

"where is is obviously digging what he believes is a red who has accidently said one thing and then something else that contridcts it. saying that."

what are you saying here? i don't think it's obvious Chaos thinks im scum? he's calling me either bad town or scum, which isn't an opinion at all

[ChaosOmega]

Do you think that you're bad town, Terata?

[ChaosOmega]

Yes, I think you're scum, for the record.

[Terata]

"Dash of WIFOM for you, if I'm scum here with you being town, I do not bother to keep engaging people about their town read of you. Because in a certain light, it might seem like I'm throwing shit on you. I'm trying to see who is scared of you vs. who is trying to read you. I would not mention you much if at all, and I would kill you N1.

You're one of the very few people in this playerlist whom I respect the play of, I'm trying to level with you here. You think my tone this game is different, look at how I cased Poro in Mafiaception. If I'm confident in a push, I do not give benefit of the doubt, and I don't word things just the way you prefer. And I'm not fucking manipulating players, I'm asking them questions."

hmm, this part is making me doubt a bit. i kinda like it. Rest is null/meh

[Terata]

Do you think that you're bad town, Terata?

no but what i think doesn't matter in your read?

[Firebringer]

bump