By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Twas the Night Before Christmas-Mafia Round 35

Hephaestos said:
it seems to me that just criticizing wonk shifts you to the dark side of his visible spectrum. You're just revenge "talking" cause you dare not revenge voting, but that's basically what you explain. "If you aren't scum I'm disappointed in you"

Similarly, people talking and not accusing you are trustworthy... that's a pretty basic picture.

So what about Moreno and prof? they haven't clearly put themselves in the vote or defend category, but surely that shouldn't prevent you from having an opinion of them?


Where is your critism of me? Where are your acusations? If you were to have voted that way on anyone I would tust you less.

There are a few ways I can see townies using votes properly. Voting because you want someone lynched. Voting because you want to pressure the person to do something be it show up more of anser questions, or pressure a person not to do something.

You're vote misses all of those. Your vote was a "I have no idea what linkz is doing but I will join anyway" You have then pretty much done nothing with it and you are now moving on to stefl.

Even with all that I said you moved to neutral. That is still far from my dark side and much of that is from my general opionion of you where I always thing scum.

Hat has used bad logic yesterday as I pointed out. Made connections with himself and ST he wanted someone selse lynched remember? and also the wording he made when he voted. That is all from day 1. He has done even more today like the bandgwagon vote. The fact people aren't jumping all over him just reminds me how in these games it is oftem more about who you are then what you actually do.

Linkz took his time getting on my dark side. It took him ignoring some things, brushing off other things and making some bad contradictory points to lean scum with him.

I have opinion on everyone as I am sure you do as well.

What are your thoughts on all the lurkers?



Around the Network
Hephaestos said:
it seems to me that just criticizing wonk shifts you to the dark side of his visible spectrum. You're just revenge "talking" cause you dare not revenge voting, but that's basically what you explain. "If you aren't scum I'm disappointed in you"

Similarly, people talking and not accusing you are trustworthy... that's a pretty basic picture.

So what about Moreno and prof? they haven't clearly put themselves in the vote or defend category, but surely that shouldn't prevent you from having an opinion of them?


I couldn't agree more here (bolded). This is nothing new though. Wonk has a serious problem of becoming warped when people are suspicious of him. Not in a good way either. The kind of tunnel vision that makes you want him lynched regardless of his alignment because they become a distraction ... and  their argument become desperate. All it took was Linkz  to lead off with a vote on him and he's labeled scum by Wonk. I don't necessarily disagree that Linkz is scum but Wonk is just everywhere.

I think I want to hear more from vette. Frankly, Wonk's posts are making my brain numb.



I am the black sheep     "of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."-Robert Anton Wilson

theprof00 said:
Well, I thought this was goign to end up with some good leads.

Linkz is the only one who should have been doc'd.

My thought process was that the inherent safeness of the MG kill was motivated by an unclear view of who might be doc'd. Looking back at yesterday, hardly anyone stood out as a good choice.

My idea was that the people who didn't understand that Linkz should have been doc'd were most likely mafia.
But it seems nobody in this thread (except for maybe Heph) had any idea....

I hate this. Stop indirectly telling the doc what to do. It's just scummy. I never like when players tell other power players who to specifically or pseudo-protect/investigate.

If anything, you're back on my scum watch. Don't under estimate what people see or don't see. Don't make it seem like there was a plan to any of this. I see this as nothing short of fishing. So, there.

Also, the buddying with Linkz makes me want to PUKE!



I am the black sheep     "of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."-Robert Anton Wilson

morenoingrato said:
@Truck:

I didn't really bother to check when the post was made, my bad, but my point still stands.
I think ST was trying to clear some suspicion of Wonk, I need more evidence, but I really have this feeling Wonk is in something.

I am not convinced by your explanation. I'll come back to you later.



Signature goes here!

hatmoza said:
theprof00 said:
Well, I thought this was goign to end up with some good leads.

Linkz is the only one who should have been doc'd.

My thought process was that the inherent safeness of the MG kill was motivated by an unclear view of who might be doc'd. Looking back at yesterday, hardly anyone stood out as a good choice.

My idea was that the people who didn't understand that Linkz should have been doc'd were most likely mafia.
But it seems nobody in this thread (except for maybe Heph) had any idea....

I hate this. Stop indirectly telling the doc what to do. It's just scummy. I never like when players tell other power players who to specifically or pseudo-protect/investigate.

If anything, you're back on my scum watch. Don't under estimate what people see or don't see. Don't make it seem like there was a plan to any of this. I see this as nothing short of fishing. So, there.

Also, the buddying with Linkz makes me want to PUKE!

ho hum.

I know I'm right, and I will read it in the scum thread eventually.

 

FYI, you're doing a great job with the doc yourself. I'm keeping a personal log of all the things I've noted (like you did in that one game), and your not doing so hot in it :D

 



Around the Network
TruckOSaurus said:
morenoingrato said:
@Truck:

I didn't really bother to check when the post was made, my bad, but my point still stands.
I think ST was trying to clear some suspicion of Wonk, I need more evidence, but I really have this feeling Wonk is in something.

I am not convinced by your explanation. I'll come back to you later.

Well, I'll be waiting to see how you explain that I didn't commit a mistake.

And I still believe in my theory, and that post of yours just further backed it up.



Wonktonodi said:
Linkzmax said:

The connection is laughable. There is no such thing as bussing while simultaneously saving. Additionally, there's no chance that I throw a teammate under the bus when the day could simply idle to no lynch or focus could have been turned to you or a lurker.(none of which is confirmed flipped scum, and thus might have been an extra townie mislynch) And if I was giving him an out, then I would unvote after he first claimed to be a counter to the nonexistant role. It's almost insulting that you'd think I'd let him make such an awful fakeclaim.

So what else has you thinking I'm scum?

As for derailing, as prof said today, the more people are put under the spotlight, the harder it is to focus on just one. Just by calling my alignment into question you create opportunity for votes on me or for people to second guess my agenda with lynching ST.

I don't mind hat's bandwagon vote as it is where I would like people to be. I've been nuetral to town on hat since the begining. As stated, I wanted him to explain his change in stance on Heph, but I also feel good about Heph so for now I'm content with them both. You were already tunneling hat day one until I said you're playing better, so I'm wouldn't be surprised if you say you think he's scum. What's your take on Heph, do you still not really think he's scum?

Yesterday as in day one? Because I don't think you've said anything of note day two yet. And if you're talking about what I brought up in this post with respect to hat, then it was only harping on his own admittance to laziness. Null tell for me, hat grows apathetic as either town or mafia.

When you voted and made your points there was only one vote on him. You make the point that any good mod would have a counter to the role he says he though MDJ had. He gets another vote. He makes a claim. I mention my thought about your conection. He Gets 2 more votes. Then you comment on what I said and not even on his claim.  So although I do think it is very unlikly that you would have killed off a fellow scum I could see you doing it to try and get on the good side of the town.

Why else do I think you are scum? I must tell you I didn't think you were. I was leaning town. I was not caring about you not making any comment on my post on hat. I was ok on the possibiblty of there being a conection between you and ST. but your insistence that my mentioning how you could connect with someone as a way to derail the thread is perposterous and doesn't sound like something you would say if you were town. As for questioning your agenda that was the point. I didn't want to see you coming back after he claimed and say we should unvote him.

If you aren't scum I am disapointed in you.

Yes I think hat is scum was sure of it yesterday and the more he posts the more I think so. However he's also posts and keeps the game interesting so I would be sad if he were lynched. Although with how popular he is that would take some doing.

My regular mistrust of heph has returned so I am back to neutral.

FF and TOS are probably the people I trust the most at the moment.

You still can't have it both ways. It's either bussing or supplying an out. I've already explained why neither even makes sense, but YOU seem to be ignoring that. You're also twisting facts as ST only had two votes on him when he softclaimed a counter. Then I kept the pressure on. Then ST fakeclaimed fully, and finally Stefl made the third vote.

When you said "However it takes more than just a connection with scum for me to think you are scum." I thought you were saying you think I'm scum and you have more evidence that you've yet to speak of.

I did comment on your post on hat. But if you're looking for more analysis, than I will refer to FF's summary: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4288890

1. Null tell. You had been talking about pressuring Marcus so you HAD to follow it with a vote. It doesn't make you town or scum, but I still feel the base reason for anyone's vote on MDJ was weak.
2. I think it was overly defensive. TOS wasn't even attacking you, he just disagreed about what constitutes "pressure." Pointing at (1) doesn't make it a good defense either since it's a null tell.
3. You always seem to let hat get to you, so I do excuse the defensiveness there. Doesn't make you town though.

Your points against hat are valid, but whereas you say he's scum trying to frame you, I see it as hat trying to get something out of you or others.

I am not insistent on that point alone. It is coupled with the other distracting posts of yours which would only broaden the town's attention rather than focus it. Something which you have yet to comment on.

If you wanted to question my agenda so I couldn't unvote then you should have done it much sooner. Firstly, I did have time to unvote with the softclaim. Second, I was around after the fakeclaim because I wanted to gauge reactions to it. I wish I could use timestamps to prove it, but you let quite a while go by from your intial posts to pointing out a possible connection. You were also the only one to consider the claim plausible and wanted to give ST a night, something I wouldn't expect from any logically thinking townie.

 

Why isn't your vote on hat if you're so sure he's scum? I can't understand why you'd be sad to lynch scum, regardless of their activity level.



morenoingrato said:
TruckOSaurus said:
morenoingrato said:
@Truck:

I didn't really bother to check when the post was made, my bad, but my point still stands.
I think ST was trying to clear some suspicion of Wonk, I need more evidence, but I really have this feeling Wonk is in something.

I am not convinced by your explanation. I'll come back to you later.

Well, I'll be waiting to see how you explain that I didn't commit a mistake.

And I still believe in my theory, and that post of yours just further backed it up.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4297955

Please answer me



theprof00 said:
Well, I thought this was goign to end up with some good leads.

Linkz is the only one who should have been doc'd.

My thought process was that the inherent safeness of the MG kill was motivated by an unclear view of who might be doc'd. Looking back at yesterday, hardly anyone stood out as a good choice.

My idea was that the people who didn't understand that Linkz should have been doc'd were most likely mafia.
But it seems nobody in this thread (except for maybe Heph) had any idea....

So you thought I was mafia for not realizing I should have been doc'd? Heh, I know I threw it out there as a consideration if ST flipped scum, but I don't actually think I'm that crucial for town to win.

I do believe Heph when he says he knew it, since he was first to suggest it really.



Wonktonodi said:

Linkz took his time getting on my dark side. It took him ignoring some things, brushing off other things and making some bad contradictory points to lean scum with him.

I have opinion on everyone as I am sure you do as well.

What are your thoughts on all the lurkers?

I can see how some of my rebuttals could be viewed as brushing off points, but give me an example of ignoring or a contradictory point.

Also here you go again. You just finish explaining how you think hat and I are scum, and you want to broaden the scope to lurkers. They do need some prodding, but you are in no position to get it started.