Adorable Game of Mafia (Everyone wins!)

[Pesco]

Reread from the very beginning

Notice to town: we are NOT lynching until there are less than 24 hours left.  We don't want to start D2 as an extension of D1 down 2 players.

Notice to town: There's no need to drag the game out to the last minute if there's an obvious lynch and nobody has anything new to say.

I agree with the assessment it was noob inexperience/hyperactive play-just wanting to do something big. The thing is scum aren't the ones who get excited in that way. I think, postulate even, that if he were scum he would have been too busy posting excitedly in his FIRST EVAR QT to reaction test in the pre-game, just after receiving his role pm.

What do scum do after that? This post is one of those instances of making excuses for suspect play. Zero scumhunting worth.

##Vote:  Raitaki
Stance on outside posting already has me on edge. Trying to make a deal out of pregame bullshit  after the fact only it makes it worse.

I'm not voting him [Raitaki] right now so much that he did it or that he's defending it so much as he's not doing anything else.

There was no new information from Raitaki between the two posts. Your reason doesn't quite sound the same from the two points in time.

Neko has been absent for a while but from what he posted I don't see any problems.
Affinity I agree with on pretty much everything that's been said.  Would not lynch.

and that leaves Raitaki.  In hindsight he looks worse than I thought, seems to be making excuses for everything, though does seem to be using some logic.  But, logic is null so... ##Vote: Raitaki (L-3)

Explain these 2 clears. The vote here is just an empty action. You don't really want to lynch Raitaki.

##Unvote ##Vote IHNN

He goes through all that only for him to chicken out and go back to voting Raitaki. Okay, well, I guess he never -was- voting Raitaki, but it almost feels like he has been, considering how he's been talking about him during the day so far. IHNN's BT vote only felt like an afterthought given the amount of attention he gave it in his post compared to everything else, and he was easily talked out of it. He barely even sounds convinced in his Raitaki vote, saying "Well he looks worse in hindsight" and moreso in "...but he's using logic! But logic is null, soooooo..."

It feels like he's scum going "Man, I don't know who to vote anymore, well I can totally get away with voting Raitaki" and just shoving his vote on while adding in inconsequential babbles on everyone else.

This actually looks opportunistic. You weren't done rereading but saw a votable opening. Jump on and forget about reading the rest of the game?

##Unvote
##Vote: Serela

Rai's wagon still hasn't convinced me he's scum instead of newbplay, but I'll hop back on if he starts showing some actual scum tendencies.

Look back up at my question of your motivation to vote Raitaki. Back there the focus was on his not doing anything. Here it's about his wagon that's dictating your scumread?

I hear the case on Omba for hit-and-run voting. I'd like to see some more back and forth between him and Kilga if I'm going to have a read on this.

[NekoNekoRex]

There was no new information from Raitaki between the two posts. Your reason doesn't quite sound the same from the two points in time.
Explain these 2 clears. The vote here is just an empty action. You don't really want to lynch Raitaki.

Look back up at my question of your motivation to vote Raitaki. Back there the focus was on his not doing anything. Here it's about his wagon that's dictating your scumread?

The first post was neck deep in RVS. There was literally nothing else to go on and the game was in a state where RVS was full of serious votes.
The second (which WAS after he had posted more) was after a change in perspective when it became readily apparent he was too newby to determine exactly how scummy he really was, but still bad enough to warrant pressure.
Since empty unvoting is bad and I didn't take a note of anything scummy enough to warrant attention to switch my vote had been on him until that point.
His scumhunting is flawed and his effort is sub-par, which are both scummy traits, but also newby ones. It's difficult to determine if he's newbscum at the moment.

Anyways time to reread Omba.

Perfect. D1 policy lynch, we can make it happen.

##Unvote
##Vote Serela
Liking this policy lynch better now.

He'd make a great policy lynch for not doing anything

Sensing a pattern here
Omba's posts seem kind of paranoid and over-reactive. Plus the above pattern makes him seem pretty suspicious to me.

I'd vote him, yeah.

[Serela]

Shadoweh: If you want townreads, mine would be you and Pesco. As for the rest of your complaints, while I disagree with some of them, I also see where you're coming from. :T I generally struggle to get anything done D1, which is why I generally also lurk the hell out of it.

Pesco:I should have elaborated on that, in hindsight it does look pretty bad >_> I had already reread the game once or twice, but I couldn't figure out who I wanted to vote out of anyone, which is the only reason I was still going at it more. I stopped afterwords because it seemed pointless to do a third or fourth reread when I hadn't gotten much out of the first couple times, since I had managed to get a scumread.

...I just noticed Raitaki is less then an hour away from a prod :/ Considering his BT case is (For being the first to try to "derail the wagon by voting IHNN", which... I'm not sure how this is supposed to be indicative of alignment at all), and being under heavy fire, him suddenly turning towards lurking it up isn't very good.  Still reluctant about actually lynching him just off sketchy play because new players are easily capable of all this as town, but, I have to admit it's starting to look sort of... yeah.

Neko:My reasoning looks forced? Eh, Pesco seems to at least agree on the "IHNN doesn't look like he really wants to lynch Raitaki" part according to the post right before this one. :Shrug: IHNN's Raitaki vote post just looks to me like throwaway babble and making up excuses to vote someone he doesn't really think is scum.

Affinity:See above. It may have been strong ed1, but the way he came back to it looks like he's falling back on the only vote he can justify due to his BT case falling through.

Huh. I reread to see what the hubbub was about Omba and most of his posts are null responses about stuff (Which isn't bad in itself, but does

[NekoNekoRex]

Neko:My reasoning looks forced? Eh, Pesco seems to at least agree on the "IHNN doesn't look like he really wants to lynch Raitaki" part according to the post right before this one. :Shrug: IHNN's Raitaki vote post just looks to me like throwaway babble and making up excuses to vote someone he doesn't really think is scum.

It looks like a wagon hop with fluff thrown in for cover. Your reasons for voting don't convince me much like other votes in IHNN
Plus what Shadoweh said about IioA

Even that post looks like a wall of commentating.

[Raitaki]

Whoops. I never noticed >_>;

At the moment, I've noticed that my call on BT was a bad call, so I've been trying to reread everyone separately (I've just remembered that I could do that by clicking on someone's profile and click "Show Posts"...) while reading general MS wiki stuff and the previous game's D1. I'm not yet confident enough to make another call though.

@Pesco: About the reason I think derailing my wagon was scummy...maybe you've already read and discarded it, but it was because I assumed that scum would levitate towards lynching more competent townies if they think they can.
@HW: ...Good point. I never considered that.

As for gut feelings, I'd say Serela's posts look a bit awkward, but I'm not one to judge >_>; Also considering how Shadoweh declared that Kilga is the first person that comes to her mind as a good townie, Kilga hasn't posted a lot, although the posts he did make don't look scummy or strange, and I'd know better than to meta.

[I have no name]

Explain these 2 clears. The vote here is just an empty action. You don't really want to lynch Raitaki.

The 2 clears mentioned are for exactly the reasons I gave.  The vote on Raitaki was because I didn't see anyone else scummy for any reasons I could pin down.  He's not the worst possible lynch I'd say, but you're right about not being my first choice any more.
##Unvote

Will re-vote after re-reading the current not-me wagons.

[Pesco]

The 2 clears mentioned are for exactly the reasons I gave.  The vote on Raitaki was because I didn't see anyone else scummy for any reasons I could pin down.  He's not the worst possible lynch I'd say, but you're right about not being my first choice any more.

The reasons you gave are not clear. What was fine about NNR's posts and what are you agreeing with from Affinity?

[Omba]

Raitaki: Considering you're not a new mafia player, I'm hard pressed to believe you're completely unable to do any scumhunting. Promises to do it at some later point do not cut it. Among other things, you're currently getting voted for not contributing anything useful. Even the worst case you can make is better than none at all. I will not listen to your excuses.

No name: How do you already know Raitaki is not your first choice anymore when you haven't done your re-read to determine your first choice yet?

Affinity: I'll give you a few hours to find the flaws in your case on me and produce a better one. As it stands, I'm inclined to believe you wanted to follow Kilga's vote on me and needed to find any sort of original reasoning to justify your own vote so you don't look like you're just sheeping him.

Serela's posts show exactly what I meant with the waffling yet to come.

[Raitaki]

Raitaki: Considering you're not a new mafia player, I'm hard pressed to believe you're completely unable to do any scumhunting. Promises to do it at some later point do not cut it. Among other things, you're currently getting voted for not contributing anything useful. Even the worst case you can make is better than none at all. I will not listen to your excuses.

Well it didn't help that in all the games I played D1 lynchings were based on N1 action results and stuff like this.

[Shadoweh]

Shadoweh: Case is neat, but I prefer the dude with a solid stance over the dude that blames his lack of a solid stance on meta. What in particular made you satisfied with IHNN's response?

Who is this guy with the solid stance you're referring to? Serela can't agree on his feelings for the person he's voting for in the same post.
To name something in particular. I did answer the question somewhat when outlining what I thought of Serela's vote.

I wouldn't say IHNN was easily talked out of his vote. He conceded an argument when he was shown he was wrong. Being wrong doesn't make you scum. You don't explain why it matters that he 'went back' to Raitaki despite fluffing your argument by reminding us how much he was talking about him. If he was already suspicious of Raitaki, and was confronted with the notion that his current suspicions were incorrect, doesn't it make sense that he voted for someone he's been suspicious of for awhile?

I think his thoughts follow a natural progression. Where do I go from here -----> Looking over people and what you think of them ----> Vote person you still find suspicious.

    I agree with the assessment it was noob inexperience/hyperactive play-just wanting to do something big. The thing is scum aren't the ones who get excited in that way. I think, postulate even, that if he were scum he would have been too busy posting excitedly in his FIRST EVAR QT to reaction test in the pre-game, just after receiving his role pm.

What do scum do after that? This post is one of those instances of making excuses for suspect play. Zero scumhunting worth.

I'm not sure what you're asking here. Afterwards they would post during the RVS? Pesco, are you scum or just trying to 'prove' that I don't scumhunt again? I'll say it again. I'm trying to understand people.

Shadoweh: If you want townreads, mine would be you and Pesco. As for the rest of your complaints, while I disagree with some of them, I also see where you're coming from. :T I generally struggle to get anything done D1, which is why I generally also lurk the hell out of it.

Why? What have Pesco and I done to seem town to you? I was commenting on your lack of scumreads.

Pesco:I should have elaborated on that, in hindsight it does look pretty bad >_> I had already reread the game once or twice, but I couldn't figure out who I wanted to vote out of anyone, which is the only reason I was still going at it more. I stopped afterwords because it seemed pointless to do a third or fourth reread when I hadn't gotten much out of the first couple times, since I had managed to get a scumread.

This is an excuse that only works as fluff to tell us you read the game four times without getting any stances on anyone. The implication in your post was that you literally only got a 'scum read' when you were cut by I have no name.

...I just noticed Raitaki is less then an hour away from a prod :/ Considering his BT case is (For being the first to try to "derail the wagon by voting IHNN", which... I'm not sure how this is supposed to be indicative of alignment at all), and being under heavy fire, him suddenly turning towards lurking it up isn't very good.  Still reluctant about actually lynching him just off sketchy play because new players are easily capable of all this as town, but, I have to admit it's starting to look sort of... yeah.

You're willing to possibly lynch the newbie not because of anything he's done, but because he almost got prodded. You can't convince yourself he's done anything deserving of being lynched in the end. This is your version of a scum read.

Neko:My reasoning looks forced? Eh, Pesco seems to at least agree on the "IHNN doesn't look like he really wants to lynch Raitaki" part according to the post right before this one. :Shrug: IHNN's Raitaki vote post just looks to me like throwaway babble and making up excuses to vote someone he doesn't really think is scum.

Affinity:See above. It may have been strong ed1, but the way he came back to it looks like he's falling back on the only vote he can justify due to his BT case falling through.

Why do we care if Pesco agrees with your reasoning? It doesn't suddenly make your post valid. Why as scum would he be looking for a real reason to justify a vote?

Huh. I reread to see what the hubbub was about Omba and most of his posts are null responses about stuff (Which isn't bad in itself, but does mean I was off in thinking "Oh Omba's been posting a lot of stuff" and not really looking at him much in terms of is-this-person-scum etc). Now that I look again, his votes look opportunistic (Serela makes excuse to not do something in rvs, Vote Serela, new guy uses random.org a bit after the point it's acceptable, vote and since he never really does anything great can just coast by on him while throwing in comments here and there, etc), I can see the case on him.

This looks almost exactly like your case on I have no name. You're describing what Omba has done and adding 'I can see a case on him', which isn't even going as far as to say 'I think he's scummy'. Because you don't. Because you're just repeating what other people are saying and hoping it sounds good enough to get you through to the next day.

To recap.
Number of people mentioned in this post: 7
Number of people Serela is willing to admit he thinks are scum: 0

##Confirm Vote: Stayin' Right Here.

[I have no name]

No name: How do you already know Raitaki is not your first choice anymore when you haven't done your re-read to determine your first choice yet?

   
Because, due to re-reading, I no longer have a first choice.

The reasons you gave are not clear. What was fine about NNR's posts and what are you agreeing with from Affinity?

I didn't see any problems with NNR, he seems to be playing the same way he always does and they didn't raise any red flags.  I didn't disagree with anything Affinity had put down at the time of those tentative clears.

Omba:
Lots of short posts, votes the new guy, wants him policy lynched (! I thought this game was supposed to not do stuff like that.)  huh what voted Raitaki as well, but had a reason.  Lots of back and forth with me either not understanding what I'm saying or trying to make me scumslip (not gonna happen).  Switches to Serela, also for policy lynch reasons?  Last game Serela played very well, not sure how that's policy-lynch worthy...except from a scum perspective.  #61 switches back to Raitaki with no text. #65 is 1 word in response to Neko.  FoS's Neko for not getting the "obvious reason" for his no-content votepost.  #99 finally explains why Serela would be a good policy lynch...for having a bad D1?  Criticizes Neko for the same reason of the FoS, 'prods' 2 players.  #110 is a call for content and a critique of me answering a question. #157 attempts to discredit Raitaki, myself, Affinity and Serela, as well as validate several of his own points made earlier.
Verdict: Likely scum.

Raitaki:
Pre-game reaction test seems overeager, overall seems to be playing somewhat similarly to myself in hindsight.  #49 is a bit of a derpy post, reads noobnull IMO.  #60 pure randomvotes during srs phase.  Votes BT for a reason in #101. #107 seems like trying to outguess scum, which at that point is not the best method.  #118 is waffling and a tentative clear of me based on BT!scum.  #122 is a way of backing out of anything later due to "being a horrible judge of character".  Nearly gets prodded, then admits to making a mistake on BT.
Verdict: Likely confused town.

Will need words to finish case!post, vote will be there.

-double cut-

[Serela]

number of people shadoweh doesn't care I think are scummy: omba and ihnn

[I have no name]

Serela:

RVS vote

I don't care how "serious" the posts are, there isn't actually much serious for me to do with them. If you haven't noticed, I've rarely been the questioning type in the first place, and I don't really feel like "seriously" pursuing something that's in actuality nothing. While acting like that is sure to help RVS end quick, I'm not good at faking conviction. If you don't believe me look at the last couple of times I was scum. >.>

Tries to self-meta clear?  Also lots of fluffy excuses for not doing anything.
#127 I addressed in my #128, the feel I get from that post is coasting scum-the rest of Serela's posts also feel like trying to coast.

Shadoweh: If you want townreads, mine would be you and Pesco. As for the rest of your complaints, while I disagree with some of them, I also see where you're coming from. :T I generally struggle to get anything done D1, which is why I generally also lurk the hell out of it.

Fluff/excuses/appeasement

Pesco:I should have elaborated on that, in hindsight it does look pretty bad >_> I had already reread the game once or twice, but I couldn't figure out who I wanted to vote out of anyone, which is the only reason I was still going at it more. I stopped afterwords because it seemed pointless to do a third or fourth reread when I hadn't gotten much out of the first couple times, since I had managed to get a scumread.

Fluff/excuses/appeasement

...I just noticed Raitaki is less then an hour away from a prod :/ Considering his BT case is (For being the first to try to "derail the wagon by voting IHNN", which... I'm not sure how this is supposed to be indicative of alignment at all), and being under heavy fire, him suddenly turning towards lurking it up isn't very good.  Still reluctant about actually lynching him just off sketchy play because new players are easily capable of all this as town, but, I have to admit it's starting to look sort of... yeah.

/Fluff/re-stating things that have already been said/waffling on Raitaki

Neko:My reasoning looks forced? Eh, Pesco seems to at least agree on the "IHNN doesn't look like he really wants to lynch Raitaki" part according to the post right before this one. :Shrug: IHNN's Raitaki vote post just looks to me like throwaway babble and making up excuses to vote someone he doesn't really think is scum.

Restating things that have already been said/validating own vote despite the reasons for voting me being the reason why I'm being voted (I can't think of a better phrasing but it's hypocritical at best and scummy at worst)

Affinity:See above. It may have been strong ed1, but the way he came back to it looks like he's falling back on the only vote he can justify due to his BT case falling through.

Further validations of the vote on me.  I think you're trying to convince yourself that I'm scum knowing I'm not.

Huh. I reread to see what the hubbub was about Omba and most of his posts are null responses about stuff (Which isn't bad in itself, but does mean I was off in thinking "Oh Omba's been posting a lot of stuff" and not really looking at him much in terms of is-this-person-scum etc). Now that I look again, his votes look opportunistic (Serela makes excuse to not do something in rvs, Vote Serela, new guy uses random.org a bit after the point it's acceptable, vote and since he never really does anything great can just coast by on him while throwing in comments here and there, etc), I can see the case on him.

As Shadoweh said, commentating without opinions other than opportunistic Omba votes...which IIRC was already said earlier.

In short, Serela has had no real opinions of his own other than the over-validated vote on me.

Vote: Serela

Would also vote Omba due to case!post part 1.

Oh btw Serela thanks for the words for the case/comments on you  :V

number of people shadoweh doesn't care I think are scummy: omba and ihnn

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZkouut-9RQ

[GMOFucker: Makin' GMOs To Fuck 'Em]

Increasing irritation toward Neko. You dropped your Raitaki vote without actually evaluating his content, so that pretty much was a votepark like I said. How is his play only newb instead of scummy? Right now it seems like you're not bothering to look into his posts beyond the surface even though they actually contain scummy and inconsistent thought processes.

Raitaki himself should have at least formulated basic thoughts on the wagons by now, which for newbtown typically isn't too hard to do on this forum if they have a basic understanding of mafia. Lurking out only to say "Serela is kinda weird" (which is kinda duh) doesn't make me want to move my vote.

I like Shadoweh's "Serela is making excuses for people's actions" point because I find that legit scummy. If a townie can justify another player's actions and proceeds to do so without questioning the player first then there's no point in bringing those actions up. I also agree that him dropping his re-reads isn't a townie effort, the defense doesn't satisfy me because "I couldn't develop scum reads" can be substituted for "I'm scum and can't figure out who to mislynch if not my buddies" pretty easily without making the story sound any less realistic. Also the "PESCO AGREES" line to defend his own case (not Pesco's) is lol. Would support this lynch.

Finally, not seeing the Omba case as is. Seconding Pesco that more back-and-forth between him/Kilga would be nice. Rex, explain this "pattern" that makes Omba look scummy? Given the talk of policy lynches pregame those posts were pretty much what I expected to pop up from at least one person regardless of alignment.

Spoiler:

Also nudeposting to make up for the lack of drrawr in this game.

FOUR HUGE CUTS none of it is related to the players I'm addressing so I'm not reading that shit sorry.

[GMOFucker: Makin' GMOs To Fuck 'Em]

EBWOP: I'm not reading that shit until after I post

[Shadoweh]

number of people shadoweh doesn't care I think are scummy: omba and ihnn

Can you possibly make a case on them that involves why you think what they're doing is scummy? (the answer to this is no because you're scum).

[Pesco]

I didn't see any problems with NNR, he seems to be playing the same way he always does and they didn't raise any red flags.  I didn't disagree with anything Affinity had put down at the time of those tentative clears.

That still doesn't tell me anything. For one, Affinity's posts don't make sense to me, so I can't agree with any of them. What then are YOU agreeing with? I haven't liked NNR's posts since his vote reason seems pretty flimsy, how is that not a problem to you?

[Shadoweh]

Well it didn't help that in all the games I played D1 lynchings were based on N1 action results and stuff like this.

Also. What even is this. Are those all mod-posts giving you subtle clues who the scum are? >_> You win mafia games by solving the mod's riddles?

[edible]FIND THE LEFT HALF OF THE RABBIT AMULET UNDERNEATH THE GIANT ROOK[/edible]

[GMOFucker: Makin' GMOs To Fuck 'Em]

Also. What even is this. Are those all mod-posts giving you subtle clues who the scum are? >_> You win mafia games by solving the mod's riddles?

k4u is confirmed scum

[Raitaki]

IHNN Bandwagon: Serela's post doesn't have me convinced at all. He didn't mention IHNN's prior bouncing around trying to scumread, as well as how justified his vote on me was considering my behaviour. BT seems to vote IHNN only because of the reaction to my vote (which has been somewhat explained by IHNN) and the votepark. PX's "he OMGUS -> VOTE" doesn't cut it for me. For my part I'd say IHNN's posts don't strike me as scum and I can see the cause and effect motivation behind many of them, so I wouldn't mark IHNN as scum just yet.
Serela Bandwagon: This bandwagon seems justified, given Serela's stance of appearing to be participating while posting neutral remarks (let's just cut it short and say I mostly agree with the way other players view Serela). His stance seems somewhat like mine so far (with less self-defense of course), so I'm not entirely sure if he's scum or new like me (as I don't know how long he has been playing MotK mafia, and his motivation strikes me to be leaning towards the self-preservation side, but not very active or enthusiastic). ##Tentative FoS
Omba case: Kilga's vote seems justified, as Omba hadn't done any serious scumhunting either, except for pressing a few people some mostly ineffective questions. Aside from that, he/she only hopped on my bandwagon early on, and at that point some might think that I was in a precarious situation with a high probability of being lynched, which I'd say can be seen as an attempt for an easy lynch. Aside from these, there isn't much else to read on.

Because it seems me scumreading based on anything aside from lack of contribution is futile, tentative vote...
*ahem* OMGUS ##Vote Omba

-cut- @Shadoweh: Well, when Mafia was introduced to SEN most of the active members have never played MS Mafia, so mods had to plant clues in modposts to provide something other than action results and slip-ups for lynchers to work with, and because most SEN mafia players never were willing to play Mafia outside that method stuck.

[Kilgamayan]

Shadowert: Case is fine, now that I can sit at home and digest it in full. Agree with it much, in fact. Just blurb at end very shocking inclusion. Notice part of my Omba vote is for fluff. Your lurker talk at end of vote post also fluff as far as I'm concerned. I find fluff scummy, hence questioning. Find your response questionable in its apparent attempt to divert my attention elsewhere. Serela case stays major suspicion, but still not 100% pleased.

Other things: Omba #157 carries air of disrespect for fellow players. No need for town to post like this. Willing to vote Serela should need arise or Omba gets markedly better, Shadoweh case very solid. Also willing to vote NNR, huh what had said things about him I agree with (particularly about NNR pretty much trying to slink away from his Raitalky vote). Also don't like needless antagonistic attitude in #131 as said before. Also also agrees with case on Omba and...cites three posts before the third page as reason? When my case mostly revolved around more recent and relevant (and scummy) things? Really? Lazy lazy lazy. Looks like effortless suspicion toss onto guy whose case was spearheaded by someone most players hold in high regard (if I may :toot: for a moment) so possible attempt to curry favor.

[Omba]

while reading general MS wiki stuff and the previous game's D1.

Did you read previous games in MotK's archives?

[Raitaki]

Yeah, but why does that have to do with anything?

[Raitaki]

EBWOP
**what

[Omba]

regarding Serela I'm not entirely sure if he's scum or new like me (as I don't know how long he has been playing MotK mafia

If you read the archives, you'd have seen Serela has been playing for a very long time - he's been in pretty much all of the recent games, I think. So there's a disconnect here.

Kilga: What does the antagonistic attitude you mentioned tell you about the player's alignment?

[Serela]

If you read the archives, you'd have seen Serela has been playing for a very long time - he's been in pretty much all of the recent games, I think. So there's a disconnect here.

Every game for the past year, so. But the reason I'm quoting is because I think this is a -really- silly thing to try to paint as some kind of scummy disconnect >.>;

I like how IHNN is apparently complaining that I'm responding to questions people ask me. :T

[Raitaki]

If you read the archives, you'd have seen Serela has been playing for a very long time - he's been in pretty much all of the recent games, I think. So there's a disconnect here.

I see. I've only been reading the previous game (how long do you think it takes for a human being trying to learn can read through 35+ pages >_>).

This changes things. ##Unvote
##Vote Serela

In retrospect, I should have put an ##unvote in that long post back there. Derp :V

[I have no name]

I like how IHNN is apparently complaining that I'm responding to questions people ask me. :T

I wrote my impressions of your post, and the conclusions I drew  from your posts.

Anyways, dinnertime.  Probably be back later.  When exactly is deadline?

[Raitaki]

I think around 23.5 hours from now?

[Kilgamayan]

Omba: Antagonism and disrespect tells me antagonistic, disrespectful player is scum.

First thing antagonism and disrespect do is cloud judgment. Players get heated heads, are more liable to take things personally, respond to things personally, generally lose focus from task at hand. Good for scum. Townies want clear judgment, scum want clouded judgment.

Second thing is make game unenjoyable. Players get depressed, lose interest and motivation. Stop caring, stop playing. Very bad for town, very good for scum.

Summary: antagonism and disrespect impede town wincon and assist scum wincon, ergo they are scummy, ergo you are scum.