Mini Normal 1888 - TwoFace Mafia - Game Over

[aronagrundy]

VOTE: eddie cane

His case on shadow seems opportunistic. And he basically just repeats what others have said.

Why is starting a wagon on someone at 0 votes opportunistic?

If someone has pointed out the logical flaws in someone's posts and you agree with it, why shouldn't you vote them?

I don't believe that logical flaws are necessarily scummy. Being inconsistent over a period of time is, repeatedly using bad logic is, but not just one instance. And he hasn't even responded yet.

But at the same time this early in the game it's fine to go off of them imo. That's just my thought process.

W/r/t eddie, it's opportunistic in the sense that he's using your logic (@eddie, i'll quote in a sec) to give the appearance of acting town.

[aronagrundy]

since when is ignoring a RHETORIC question scum indicative? this is blatantly misrepping a situation. also in reply to 71: it isn't scum afraid of getting lynched, i5s nai newb afraid of getting lynched. I'm really annoyed how you're trying to push a lynch on a newbie for awful reasonig this early. you're right, you're not an ic, but that doesn't mean you should be an asshole. he's new, I called him out a bit for the rvs vote questioning too. that's not scum indicative at all. but actually, viewing your iso, you've been tunnelling him from your first post.

**ignores every question asked to it**

what questions has dogwatch ignored?

You just quoted it in your previous post.

So by every question you meant one question that could easily be read as rhetorical?

Seems like you are misrepresenting things in the face of pressure on grundy's awful logic. Don't worry. Once she flips i'm coming after you.

You repeat the line about the rhetorical question. A lot of the post is fluff, too, calling him an asshole and claiming he's been tunneling dog since his first post...which is pretty bizarre. I don't think scum would place an RVS vote with the objective of tunneling that player.

[Eddie Cane]

I did use the word rhetoric from him, yes. to be honest I'd probably use sarcastic myself. fitebringer brought up the idea of shadowstep. however, I think shadow step is more likely to flip scum than you. asshole is not filler in this context - it is scum indicative. the line about the IC is what it's in reference to - i only have mobile so I don't type walls or do fancy shmanymcy multi quoting often. there was no need to bring up he wasn't an ic, he was simply omgusing indirectly.

[Transcend]

O fuq 6 pages

[Transcend]

Vote stays

I tr arona, moz, barley, and shadow.

Shadow i think we're town together this time! You're always scum and I'm always town jajaj.

[Transcend]

Fos Eddie as well. Shadow is a shit counterwagon to Fire.

[aronagrundy]

I don't think shadow is a counterwagon to fire? He's a counterwagon to dog, who's a counterwagon to dog, who's a counterwagon to me, who's a counterwagon to fire tho!

[aronagrundy]

I did use the word rhetoric from him, yes. to be honest I'd probably use sarcastic myself. fitebringer brought up the idea of shadowstep. however, I think shadow step is more likely to flip scum than you. asshole is not filler in this context - it is scum indicative. the line about the IC is what it's in reference to - i only have mobile so I don't type walls or do fancy shmanymcy multi quoting often. there was no need to bring up he wasn't an ic, he was simply omgusing indirectly.

How is being an asshole scum indicative? Also he said he wasn't an IC in reference to fire bringing up experience

[Eddie Cane]

in this scenario he's taking advantage of a beginner. that is the asshole attitude I am referring to.

[Eddie Cane]

Fos Eddie as well. Shadow is a shit counterwagon to Fire.

It is indeed a counterwagon to dog. you should probably vote me over fire though as I did take his argument.

[mozamis]

you should probably vote me over fire though as I did take his argument.

this looks really self conscious and trying-too-hard. I'm happy with my Dog vote, but you're next on the Moz list.

[FrankJaeger]

Fos Eddie as well.

[FrankJaeger]

Not sure if arona is town or scum yet

[FrankJaeger]

VOTE: eddie cane

His case on shadow seems opportunistic. And he basically just repeats what others have said.

Why is starting a wagon on someone at 0 votes opportunistic?

If someone has pointed out the logical flaws in someone's posts and you agree with it, why shouldn't you vote them?

I don't believe that logical flaws are necessarily scummy. Being inconsistent over a period of time is, repeatedly using bad logic is, but not just one instance. And he hasn't even responded yet.

But at the same time this early in the game it's fine to go off of them imo. That's just my thought process.

W/r/t eddie, it's opportunistic in the sense that he's using your logic (@eddie, i'll quote in a sec) to give the appearance of acting town.

oh, and fire's responses look town. he seems measured and questioning his attackers in a "i dont care, i'm innocent" kinda way.
time to stop voting fire.

What do you make of his 180 on dog?

This is kinda scummy.

[gerryoat]

VOTE: Transcend

he slipped

[FrankJaeger]

UNVOTE: fire

[FrankJaeger]

VOTE: Transcend

he slipped

? Iso shows nothing

[FrankJaeger]

Moza maybe scum.

[Transcend]

i think he thinks i slipped bc i fosed moz and now i tr him

negate that theory otherwise

[NorskaBlue]

Ok wow, a lot of stuff has happened since I last posted.

I like the aggression here. Moz has gone for the kill and hasn't flowered it up with an over-worded explanation.

-Do you think his aggressiveness is a townread, or are you just approving of it in general? If it is a townread, do you think scum wouldn't be aggressive?

-Again, is over-worded explanations and analysis' scumtells, or do you just like how Moz is being straightforward?

Well I've just wanted to get a wagon going honestly.

That said 51 is bad. Why would scum!dogwatch be resisting town!fire's wagon at this stage in the game?

Do you think any resistance to a wagon is scummy? If so, can you elaborate why?

aorngrundy's answers seem honest.
dogwatch looks like nervous scum.

What aspect of Arona's answers makes you think they are honest?

VOTE: eddie cane

His case on shadow seems opportunistic. And he basically just repeats what others have said.

Do you disagree with any of shadows arguments? If so, what are your reasons/counterarguments? If not, how is it opportunistic?

Eh it's part because he seems experienced, part because I can see why he's focusing on dogwatch. A 180 now on my part but I can see the "inexperienced scum getting towncred" logic about dog.

So you admit to doing a 180 yourself, but are scumreading fire for his 180? Care to explain the contradiction?

If someone has pointed out the logical flaws in someone's posts and you agree with it, why shouldn't you vote them?

Are you saying there will never be a situation where you agree with a scum? Do you think you should follow any reads made by those you believe to be town, or come to your own conclusions? How alignment-indicative do you think flaws in logic are, considering this game is mostly based on discussion and judgement?

This is kinda scummy.

Can you go into any more detail? What elements of it are scummy?

VOTE: Transcend

he slipped

Where and how?

[Keyser Söze]

I'm saying if he's scum then it's NOT a noob scum tell, as evidenced by his past posts. that's just his style of posting regardless. It just initially caught my eye because Lamist in my experience often is a noob scum tell.. but I also haven't played a game in 9 years, so my readings can be outdated.

Yes, I was wondering why you were projecting your newb-scum-tell on him - if you dug up his "past games" this could explain why you didn't follow up with your suspicion with a VOTE. IN general, 'LAMIST' is null for me (I get s/read alot for people thinking my pro-town posts are me

trying-to-look-townie

).

Fire has three votes now with zero reasoning behind them.

Can the three of you explain?

We're getting out of the rvs stage at this point.

The game has only begun.
I think the above can be catorgorized as LAMIST
We are in RVS.
Why did you expect those three to have deep/supporting reasons for their naked RVS votes?

Exactly, which is why his defense lacks substance. If it's going to dissipate anyway, is anyone really going to give him towncred for defending your wagon?

I also never said dog was scum. I've wanted to start a wagon and felt like fucking with him

I agree here, in theory, 'scum' will more likely choose to defend a 'townie' when the wagon/scum-case has more reasoning and substance (then they reap the greater town-cred). Thinking scum would defend an empty RVS wagon on town is a bit too far-fetched for me. I'd be more concerned with players defending players at the meaty end of the game.

[Keyser Söze]

It's trying to show that he's being pro town by asking a bunch of people as to why they are RVS voting Fire. Being on 3 votes is nothing. It's L-4, what's the big deal?

Have you dug up DogWatch's town/scum meta to see if he makes 'LAMIST' observations?

Scum are survivalistic, town are less so. As town you're not as worried about getting lynched as you are as scum. As scum you quickly want a CW. As town you're more relaxed.

That's your personal view which you shouldn't be projecting onto others' playstyle (unless you have a vast meta profile on each player) - not all players will share your opinion.

I.e I have seen townies try to stay alive with every vestige of their desperate soul. Townies can be just as survivalist as scum.

[DogWatch]

keyser, I didn't view those fire votes as rvs. As written in the post you quoted, I said we were moving out of rvs at the time. Fire had made several posts and suddenly there were three votes on him. I thought they'd seen something I hadn't, so I asked why.

I don't really understand Rvs then I guess, never heard of it until I started looking at games on this site.

[Keyser Söze]

I don't know what kinda townie you are, but I try my ass off to not get lynched regardless of alignment. this is utter bullshit.

in fact
VOTE: shadowstep

I actually had a mild town-lean on Shadow_step's attempt to force his expectations-of-town-play down our throat [i.e stubborn town].

Why do you think only scum-Shadow_step can be playing IC?

[Keyser Söze]

keyser, I didn't view those fire votes as rvs. As written in the post you quoted, I said we were moving out of rvs at the time. Fire had made several posts and suddenly there were three votes on him. I thought they'd seen something I hadn't, so I asked why.

I don't really understand Rvs then I guess, never heard of it until I started looking at games on this site.

Sorry, I will need to re-read that early phase, I'm still catching up - but I did not see any real substance to their 'genuine' suspicion at the time (typical for early D1 votes).