Mini Normal 1879 Bringer Mafia II [Game Over]

[Fro99er]

Call this stylistic, but how often do you see non-scum players so sensitive to their image?

I'm a shining example of one of those players, tbh. I use self-meta in basically every game because I very much care about reassuring everyone this is my town image, whether I'm town or scum.

[Lowell]

Well, fine. But I've played a lot of games and only when I'm aligned with scum do I find myself frantically searching the thread for every ill mention of my name. It feels like that's what both naomi and EC are doing here. But if you're saying you don't agree with the general philosophy there, then not sure what the point in arguing with you is.

[Terata]

We can engage for a bit, Terata. Why is my 282 addressing Wheme not pro-town, and why is your 311 addressing Wheme pro-town?

i don't look for anti-pro-towns and pro-towns. i look for town and mafia. I think mafia has a different kind of hmm.. way? of trying to show pro-towniness. And 1 way i've seen more than others is the way of talking a lot about old meta/mechanics/contraditions, because it's something they can observe as OBJECTIVELY scummy, and genuinely push on, which they can't do with general reads and subjective reads, when they have TMI. see what im getting at?

Not really. My point is that your question seems completely taken part-and-parcel from my question. So why is it scummy if I ask it but not scummy if you ask the same question?

i don't think the question is scummy by itself. Does that answer the question?

Yes, but then there's another question. Here's your summary of my 282 where I asked that question:

this post reads very scripted/forced to me, and the only time he goes into a little bit of a deeper analysis is when he's comparing something to a past game, which is something that's easy to talk about when you're scum because it's something you believe in and can give your true thoughts on. Also looking for contradictions/unexplained progressions more than i'd like. I think that's sometimes a mafia trait too, because it's a simple thing to look for/push on.

Scummiest post of the game thus far to me

So I was focusing on your criticism that the questions focused on contradictions and unexplained progressions, but that is not by itself enough to make it scummy. That's fair. So I guess the tone here is the clincher. Can you explain how my tone in 282 seems to be scripted or forced, and how when you asked seemingly the same question in 311, your tone was more natural?

im not gonna describe my own play since that's pretty pointless but for the problems i had with your post, it was mainly the lack of anything i feel i coming from your gut more than something you could "think up" as solving. It's usually mixed in with the reads of players and i felt like you lacked that. I took some examples of things you did that i think lacked that, and that questions was 1 thing, you asking for someone's read without any additional thoughts was one. And then your slightly longer explanation around the older game. I guess i don't have any STRONG problems with your tone in the question more than the lack of things i like surrounding it. Tho when fr099 mentioned it i do agree it looked a bit shady how you asked IF it changed Wheme's read on Fr099 when you knew yourself it didn't change. I would've liked you to mention the "trap" before waiting for his answer. Also you lacked content aside from that post i liked, so that strengthened my feeling you lacked any reads you truly believed in.

[Fro99er]

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.

Lowell -- this is not panic.

[Fro99er]

VOTE: Lowell

[Fro99er]

Well, fine. But I've played a lot of games and only when I'm aligned with scum do I find myself frantically searching the thread for every ill mention of my name. It feels like that's what both naomi and EC are doing here.

Are you saying naomi and EC are beetlejuicing? Or are you criticizing them for defending themselves?

It's pretty natural to defend oneself. Chaos just defended himself against me, and that was one of his only 7 posts at the time he made that post. How is that different from what they did?

[ECMitchell]

Mafia during break. Oh joy!

Can I just point out that I merely put an FOS on both EC and naomi and they both immediately flipped their shit on me? I am all powerful. Fear me.

Is it? Naomi crafted an entire case to OMGUS my FOS. That matters. And EC is clearly panicking. I'm through the looking glass, here, don't try to rattle me.

Really curious to know where exactly you think I "flipped [my] shit" or panicked. I merely challenged your statement, which you still really haven't responded to or attempted to clarify.

I don't think so.

EC hasn't had much of a strong stance on anything or anyone the whole game,

but clearly is hypersensitive to his image. How is this town?

Again, going to challenge you on the bold text. Is saying, "I'd be fine with a Cooperative Sheep lynch today," and, "I feel Cooperative Sheep, WhemeStar, and Terata could be a scum team," not a strong enough stance for you?

You're making a lot of hasty statements, but you've yet to prove any of it.

Well, fine. But I've played a lot of games and only when I'm aligned with scum do I find myself frantically searching the thread for every ill mention of my name. It feels like that's what both naomi and EC are doing here.

But if you're saying you don't agree with the general philosophy there, then not sure what the point in arguing with you is.

Disagreement in philosophy means it's not an argument worth having? That's what a good chunk of this game is all about, my friend.

[Naomi-Tan]

Can I just point out that I merely put an FOS on both EC and naomi and they both immediately flipped their shit on me? I am all powerful. Fear me.

this post is ew

Is it? Naomi crafted an entire case to OMGUS my FOS. That matters. And EC is clearly panicking. I'm through the looking glass, here, don't try to rattle me.

No one doesn't 'craft' contradictions in posts. So you crafted your own case.

[ECMitchell]

I missed a lot more than I thought in the past couple hours. @Terata, I'll respond to your post later.

[Naomi-Tan]

Yeah I have to go too I skipped over a bunch of stuff too as i was on a short time

[Lowell]

Well, fine. But I've played a lot of games and only when I'm aligned with scum do I find myself frantically searching the thread for every ill mention of my name. It feels like that's what both naomi and EC are doing here.

Are you saying naomi and EC are beetlejuicing? Or are you criticizing them for defending themselves?

It's pretty natural to defend oneself. Chaos just defended himself against me, and that was one of his only 7 posts at the time he made that post. How is that different from what they did?

I don't know what beetlejuicing means. What I'm saying is I fos'd naomi and she came back with a case against me and voted me. What I'm also saying is that had I not mentioned her in my post (or mentioned her as town) I bet she would not have done that. To me it looks like a visceral, panicked OMGUS response to unwanted attention. Which is different than, "you said X, here is why I disagree with X". So, whatever you call that, it's bad.

[Cooperative Sheep]

She kind of did the same thing to me, when I did my WK tell - even though I ruled her as town and said the tell didn't apply to her she seemed to get a little aggro about it.
Then again, I recall Tetara kinda doing the same thing, so seems like a thin scumtell, yeah?

Having a hard time parsing a lot of the other cases - they mostly seemed to be based on hypocrisy (which I feel has been a cornerstone of every case so far) and I also think a lot of people are mxing up hypocrisy with 'logic I don't understand/don't agree with and don't care to try to' which seems really different to me.

My scum reads remain about the same, I'll remind people that I've had issues with Chaos for some time now, just in case anyone wants to have a complaint about me hopping on that wagon if it catches much more steam But I'm happy with it and Hawk as frontrunners.

[Fro99er]

Having a hard time parsing a lot of the other cases - they mostly seemed to be based on hypocrisy (which I feel has been a cornerstone of every case so far)

did you read my case on Chaos. It had nothing to do with hypocrisy.

[Fro99er]

Basically it's still this, but Frogger looks worse for...well, how he's reacting and being hypocritical,

It's also pretty ironic for you to call out cases for being hypocritical...just saying...

[Cooperative Sheep]

I'm not calling out cases for being hypocritical, I'm calling them out for being about hypocrisy.

Your case, to my mind, is based around an opinion of a given question being scummy vibing and a similar one not being - I think you're playing on the same hypocrisy basketball court they are, but you're claiming you're playing volleyball. I think it's a squint to call it not about the same foundation, and even if it is, it's about the 'feels' you get - and that's not a feel I'm getting.

I'm still fine calling Chaos scum though, I just got there on the WK road.

[Fro99er]

Your case, to my mind, is based around an opinion of a given question being scummy vibing and a similar one not being

That's not what my case is about at all. That's just a small part of it. You didn't read, did you?

[Cooperative Sheep]

I did read - what do you think is the core element of your case if not the points I've made?

[Cooperative Sheep]

Oh, sorry, forgot the pro-town answer is to say I didn't read, and for you to f off

But seriously, what do you consider the core?

[Fro99er]

I did read - what do you think is the core element of your case if not the points I've made?

What do I think the core element of my own case is? lol

Manipulation, meta, tone.

I showed his manipulation...it was the main core of my case and the vast majority of that post.

I showed why some of the things he's said/done didn't jive with my meta of him.

I showed why his and terata's posts were different ... tone.

Only a tiny part was him shouting "hypocrisy" around Terata at the end. You really didn't read.

[Fro99er]

I took out the very last paragraph. ONE single paragraph. And I also took out the very first sentence (which was calling myself hypocritical about walls). Please tell me

exactly where

you think the core of my case is about hypocrisy now that I have that one final paragraph removed..

Spoiler: for sheep

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.

[Cooperative Sheep]

I note that you do mention tone - which I mentioned also. I consider the manipulation to fall within that same vein, if you disagree, fine, but it's where I'm putting it (and I did talk about both)
I didn't perceive meta as a core element of your case, I'll agree - I didn't think you particularly supported that in an 'oh wow, he nailed it' vein - and at least I talked about 2/3rds of your main point.

[Naomi-Tan]

also feels like everyone ignored my case dismissing it as OMGUS when it pointed out obvious missreping and multiple times they contradicted themselves within their own post.

[Fro99er]

I think sheep read the first line of my wall and thought "this case is about hypocrisy"

[Fro99er]

I consider the manipulation to fall within that same vein,

manipulation is the same thing as hypocrisy?

Bullshit. You just don't want to admit you're wrong.

[Cooperative Sheep]

I don't even get the point either of you are having right now - I agree Chaos is scum, I don't like either of your cases overmuch...so where's the fire. I could say I think Chaos is scum because the trees told me and that your cases are made out of pixie dust and marshmallows - you both clearly like to mock me as having no logic, so I don't know why you're annoyed that I don't love your logic, even if we're at the same destination (and in Frogger's case, ignoring what I've said).