None of this is in order, by the way.
Zak points ? Ad Hominim my ass. I?m allowed to say that I think something is dumb, and I?m allowed to say that I think an idea is stupid. This is not ad hominim. Learn what ad hominim means. As hominim would be me saying something like ?I think ?you- are an idiot.?
Hey, I didn?t say that, I said the idea was stupid. That is no ad hom.
Defending looks scummy ? I didn?t know that, actually. I disagree with you. Not defending is equally scummy. Offense is not a good defense because the accusations still stand. An accused criminal doesn?t say ?That guy is a bigger crook?. The accused has to defend himself before he can help find real criminals.
I used some analysis. Minor, I?ll admit, but at the time, I did use some analysis. It was at the beginning to the freaking day, when there was nothing to go on. Now, I?d reiterate those same points. Other people have agreed with me too since then. Are they not using analysis either?
Bugger off. I?ll be the first to admit that I have a different style of playing. I think I mentioned it almost right away. I?m just as likely to be town as you are, from where anybody else is standing. All you have is your analysis, and your analysis can be way off. That?s how mafia works. But still, you?d rather lynch a proposed power role on day one, then something else, if only because you feel your analysis is perfect? No. That?s a terrible idea. If anything, you lynch me tomorrow after I give my investigation (if I end up claiming somebody is town). Then you find out I?m telling the truth, and you have a cleared townie. Either that, or I fish up scum at night. Those are the best two options for the town at the moment. The worst is that I am lying, fake claim somebody is town, you lynch me, and I turn up scum. Then you get nothing for trouble, except a lynched scum on day 2, which is still pretty good. So, it comes down to it ? which is the bigger risk for town? Believing me? Or assuming I?m lying?
Scum hunting ? I?ll get right on that.
My claim ? yes, that is a giving up sort of remark, I know. And I did give up. I gave up trying to prove to you that your arguments against more were ridiculous, because I just didn?t feel like repeating the same thing over and over again. The claim was the only option I had left, and so I went with it.
Mafia is Serious Business. I take it seriously, but I?m light hearted about it at the same time. The claim ?isn?t- a free pass, and I know that. I?ve been in this situation before. I get one night to find scum, and even if I succeed, then you guys could just make a case that I sold a scum buddy. I can?t win and I know it, so I?m just going to be going at face value. This is what I do, you don?t like it? Tough.
Zak - Oh man, I forgot about your accidental edit early in the game. Also voted Pesco.
His first real post and second ? they are doozies. He goes through several people he feels are scummy, and gives reasons why he believes this. Top of his lists are Myself, Pesco, and Donut. It?s post 89, and I recommend reading it for yourself. Notes that he didn?t catch any town yet, and caught three scum. Interesting way of phrasing it. He thinks Pesco is scum-pesco and I just blundered into suspicions and am trying to blunder out. Thinks donut could be okay.
Notes I make a baseless accusation of Cart. Tells me why my vote matters so much even if I don?t think it matters where it stands right now. Tells me to actively hunt scum. Tells me to stop being ?cute? with the Serp gambit. Thinks I?m the one who started calling the donut voting a bandwagon (I wasn?t, it was actually Neitz, but hey cool, misrep).
Cart ?(Agreeing with you on the don?t lynch the cop thing. I?m also getting suspicious of people who want me lynched today. I can understand people who think I am scummy. But to actively want to the lynch the claimed cop on day 1 is a big problem in my mind.)
Addresses Kiro, saying why he thinks Zakeri is somebody to watch out for. Doesn?t like how Pesco has a reputation for being lynched day 1, and think it?s not wise to lynch him. Thinks Donut and Pesco have only been joking. Thinks donut should have an opinion now that it?s known that he and kiro weren?t just joking.
Says it?s a problem to give town credit based on long posts without addressing content. Says I?m handicapping my own bandwagon and getting mad at Neitz for weak votes. Mad at me for prodding Dorian, cause Dorian is ?clearly clueless?. (Okay, this is making me suspicious of Dorian and Cart again? notice how he jumps to Dorian?s defense right away, and also notice how he seems to have some knowledge of who is town.)
Gives me four things to chew on. 1) ? Some mistakes aren?t indicative of scum. 2) why he thinks people are suspicious of me ? it?s because I didn?t change my vote until well after my point of contention, it seems. 3) Explains again that dorian is a lackluster player and 4) I shouldn?t be mad that they ruined my master plan of catching potential scum Serp.
Explains that Dorian is just weak, not townie or scummy. That?s the third time he?s jumped on defending Dorian.
Serp ? (Geez, why do I find myself agreeing with you so much? I think it?s because you?re making the same observations I?ve made and then NOT CREDITING ME FOR THEM. I?m noticing a penalization in effort as well, as you put it. And if it doesn?t fit somebody else?s definition of effort, than it must be not scum hunting, which seems to be the worst sin you can commit in mafia on this board.
I?m going to throw in that I have a lynch all lurkers policy. Dorian is not posting enough content for the amount of posting he has done. This is lurking. This is a problem.)
Serious points on his posts now ? thinks RVS ended when I confirmed voted donut. Explains when RVS ends. Is frustrated that few people commented on my case for donut. (I never had a case on donut, though? so ya) Thinks donut?s conduct is weird. Notes donut voted Kiro, that kiro explained his vote, that donut agreed, but that donut didn?t change his vote off kiro. Agrees with Neitz. Says the case on Kiro is fishy. Says that people?s issues with me are only that it?s different techniques. Thinks Neitz and Affinty are scumhunting. Votes Donut. (I disagree here, it does not look like affinity was scum hunting at all. It looks like he took an easy target and rolled with it.) Lists donut and
Pesco as his top scum choices, and tells me to throw my vote around.
Explains that scum should want to extend RVS to waste day. Cross posts with me.
Donut ? Man, I really can?t tell if your first post is RVS or not. Mostly because it?s a response to me voting you. RVS, not really. DATBF ? oh hells ya that post is.
Notes that Pesco ended the RVS phase. Finds this scummy. Also notes that Kiro is voting Cart because of a vote in the RVS. Votes Kiro and demands a better reason for Kiro?s vote on Cart.
Explains why he didn?t respond to my vote on him. Assumed it was RVS. Then explains why he was on Pesco ? just to stir up some conversation. Hits himself when he gets the explanation about the difference between Pesco?s and Kiro?s votes. Does not unvote, however.
Thinks Cart is reaching, and agrees that his vote should go off kiro. Donut unvotes. He also expresses his inability to play mafia well. Seems generally curious about why scum want to end the RVS.
Cautions me. Says don?t be fooled by walls of text. Still wants more clarification on stuff.
Votes me, thinks my post scream ?WTF?. Asks if I would lynch a suspicious person for some value. (Hint ? I would. But I never found Serp suspicious, so in regards to the post and context of what I was saying, his accusation is coming out of nowhere). EBWOP: - Everything I say he finds suspicious.
Pesco ? Your claim. I feel like that?s almost a doc role. And I?m sure somebody will kill me for suggesting that. But I also feel that if you were actually a real doc, you would know it and actively say it. So I?m troubled by your claim. Deeply troubled.
I?m glad Neitz made that post of his. Pesco ?did- breadcrumb his role. Breadcrumbing is powerful for analysis and safety. So? I?m inclined to be a little upset about this, because on one hand I like breadcrumbing as a townie tell, but at the same time I know mafia will use it as well to protect themselves. Urg.
Cool, your first post doesn?t even have a reason for your random vote.
Post 42 ? this is the first serious post in the game, I?m going to say. Srs bsns. Ya, everything before this seems mostly garbage, but Pesco starts up the real action by calling donut jumpy? did anybody else think donut was jumpy? I certainly didn?t.
Post 51 ? An asprin reference. He?s tripping on it, he says.
Votes Kiro, and underlines the part of ?there?s a case of Donut trying too hard on NF by NF.? Wants an explanation of that.
Says he has seen no scum intent in donut, so is leaving donut alone.
Affinity ? You should read more Oscar Wilde
Wonders why I have a problem with a weak reason. Wonders why I didn?t vote Neitz if I don?t like Neitz?s weak reason and I didn?t have a serious vote beforehand. Votes me. Thinks pesco is avoiding questions.
Rouk ? You?ve had it in for pesco from the beginning of this game, it looks like. 2:22, aye?
Asks about high profile. Note how long it took for Pesco to get the game started.
Can?t understand Pesco, right from the get go. Says he?d probably vote Neitz for the high profile comment.
Defends donut for against Neitz. Donut?s post was ?false severetiy?? then he gets on Donut?s case for accusing Pesco of ending the RVS.
Bothred by the Donut/pesco conversation. Notes they dropped their cases too easily and then both picked on Kiro.
Notes deflection isn?t a good thing. Accuses Pesco of deflecting?
Doesn?t like pesco?s logic, cause it can work in the same way against pesco.
Notes dorian didn?t have much content in his first serious post.
Kiro ? Votes Cart? for not trying to get on the following cases ? Myself, Pesco, and donut. (Here, this is amusing. Notice how the game started on the same three people, and haven?t really shifted to anybody else? This is not good.)
Defends his vote on Cart by saying that cart?s second vote has enough reason behind to be considered a real vote. Challenge?s donut to disagree with him.
Dorian ? Hey, there?s somebody who does read Oscar Wilde. And even tells people to do so.
Thinks I?m suspicious because I don?t like the bandwagon I?m on. Says he needs to stop being lazy, also.
Apologizes when I explain to him that my vote was before the wagon and was RVS. Accepts this, then says he is tired. Thinks he is clueless, not pesco.
Neitz ? Starts the whole ?donut wants a bandwagon on himself? theory. This seems to follow a logic that early bandwagons fail, and since scum hop bandwagons, being bandwagoned as scum at the beginning is a good idea.
Explains high profile as ? Donut not responding to my case against him? and long and over exaggerated joke posts. Admits this is weak. Still assumes that Donut wants to be bandwagoned. Neitz wants to start a bandwagon.
Explains why he believes donut would want a bandwagon. So that we can ?forget? about donut later. This never happened.
Explains why he was suspicious of Donut? for getting mad at the yuyuko doll joke. Tells me why he finds bandwagons useful on day 1. Thinks donut has been reacting poorly to pressure. Something about ninjas? Finds pesco acting strange.
