mostlytechnic Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Pudding head, um, but no, they don't. I've said over and over. When I was talking about a traitor, I wasn't thinking of the "official" mafiascum role. In my mind, based on Jarl's posting, I was assuming there might be a recruit role in the scum where the "traitor" is a townie who gets converted once they and the scum hook up. That's basically what we had in a previous life where I was a scummo. In that case, I don't think the "traitor" knew anything. But it's certainly conceivable (and apparently Jarl thought this, assuming his asking for someone to PM him was legit) that the recruitable person knows they're recruitable and so they're looking for the scum at the same time as the scum are looking for them. My whole point was just that IF this happened and IF someone was converted from town to scum (as implied by Jarl's posts), then that should be considered when looking at anything the investigator has done. The exact details of the role are really pretty irrelevant to that point.
Adam Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 I'm not undermining investigation results, I'm reminding people to be careful because there's legitimate reason to think that someone's alliance MAY have changed. And there's a difference between Jarl's defending Tarben and what I said about Crane. My position was that I - just me, not saying you have to think like this, but I - think he's town because of this analysis I did of facts. I looked at vote patterns and came to a logical conclusion. I then shared that so that others can look at it and see if it makes sense or if they see holes in my logic so that they could tell me that. Say what you guys want, my job is simple. Look at the evidence and try to get reads on every player. One day down, 3 results received, i want to start advancing the game. I'm not defending tarben, just giving my views from day one. If we can't attempt to make assumptions based on players actions then why are we even here?? You can look at the same stuff I did and form your own opinion, that's your job. My job is to make the most informed decision based on my interpretation of the given data. I could sit idly by and wait for someone to start a bandwagon, but I'd prefer advance this game beyond a game of follow the leader. And speaking of follow the leader, are people already claiming to pudding? The more things change, the more they stay the same...
Dragonfire Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Is it possible the traitor, if they even knew they had the possibility to be one, was killed off, say Brand? Funny you say this, since I remember a certain traitor by the name of Brand in a previous game... of life. He was also lynched Day One, and turned up Scum (well, he was janitored, but would have turned up scum anyway). Assuming this game is like that one, then no, none of the dead could have been the traitor. This is not any defending Dar here because there is much I don't agree on with him. but I don't agree and see Puddle heads point about including Dar as middle, quiet, under the radar guy. He has said pretty much of contens in two days but some nonsence also. :wacko: What? "Disclaimer: I'm not defending him because it looks scummy. He has said stuff with content and nonsense as well". First, when have I ever said nonsense? Secondly, this post looks disturbingly like Lambi's post from Day One where she flip-flopped on her Tarben read in exactly the same way as you are doing now. She was scum. What I think about the traitor role is, if there is one: I think the traitor knows that he is scum but he doesn´t know who the others are and the other scum doesn´t know who the traitor is. You seem awfully informed on the traitor role. Right, but Petr isn't exactly under suspicion, as you are, and his posts have a bit more substantial word-meats than yours do. It'd also be a tad nice if you'd address the other things he commented upon. Defense noted.
MagPiesRUs Posted July 15, 2015 Author Posted July 15, 2015 You may now vote. With 18 players remaining, 10 votes are required to lynch. 48 hours remain in the day.
mostlytechnic Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 I will also Vote: Mist (Mencot) We have the evidence of Mist being blocked when there's missing night kills, and at worst case, a vanilla town claim.
Piratedave84 Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 I'm thorn here. On the one hand we have Mist for which we have a fair amount of evidence where he was blocked while there was a lack of second kill. On the other hand we have Munud who has contradicted himself, seems to have knowledge of traitor-related info that no one else seems to have and is overall scummy in his posts. Then we have all the lurkers, leechers and followers flying under the radar ... The choice of vote is pretty clear but it aggravates me that it's so easy and that we hardly discussed anything else than the traitor ... again ... For now I Vote: Mist (Mencot)
mostlytechnic Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 On the one hand we have Mist for which we have a fair amount of evidence where he was blocked while there was a lack of second kill. On the other hand we have Munud who has contradicted himself, seems to have knowledge of traitor-related info that no one else seems to have and is overall scummy in his posts. Then we have all the lurkers, leechers and followers flying under the radar ... The choice of vote is pretty clear but it aggravates me that it's so easy and that we hardly discussed anything else than the traitor ... again ... Seriously, where are you getting this? The accusations from pudding that I contradicted myself, but I explained that there was no contradiction? What "knowledge" do I have???? I've looked at the evidence (Jarl's posts, mostly) and said what I think could be explanations of it. Nothing is secret knowledge. And what is so scummy about my posts? That I'm looking at what people say and vote and analyze it? Isn't that the definition of what the town is supposed to do? and I wholeheartedly agree that there are way too many quiet people letting the scum slip among them and hide. That's a big part of why I think people are perceiving me as scummy - because I ACTUALLY TALK and so there's stuff for you to nitpick at me? Frankly, Petr, I found your post scummy. You just vaguely brought up thin accusations other people made, complained about quiet people, placed an obvious vote, and contributed exactly ZERO to the scumhunt. In other words, exactly the sort of thing scum to do accuse townies and try to get them lynched.
Chromeknight Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Well, it all seems too easy. I can think of several ways kills could go missing and Mist still be town. But it seems Mist couldn't. So this lynch is testing a theory. It's the simplest explination, we'll see how it pans out. [bVote: Mist(Mencot)[/] Vote: Mist(Mencot)
Hinckley Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Vote: Mist (Mencot) If you are Loyal I apologize but this is a policy lynch and our results need to be tested. Pudding head, um, but no, they don't. I've said over and over. We'll have to agree to disagree because yes, they do. Ok, so I just read the mafia wiki description of traitor, and it's not quite was I was thinking from previous games here. A traitor is someone who might know at least part of the scum team (from the start) but investigates as town. And as for the traitor thing, ... my comments about the traitor were not based on the classical mafiascum traitor role, but a recruit role of some sort. So then yes, there are roles that can be recruited but investigate town until they're recruited. Petrus said the point you made that the traitor would investigate as Town was odd since it's not in the traditional description. In those quotes above, your first point about the role that you just looked up on mafiascum is that it investigates as Town and then when you backtrack later, you say you didn't base your comments on mafiascum. Blatant contradiction. That is just my opinion, though. Clearly, you disagree, as you would if you were Scum and slipped up.
Piratedave84 Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Seriously, where are you getting this? The accusations from pudding that I contradicted myself, but I explained that there was no contradiction? What "knowledge" do I have???? I've looked at the evidence (Jarl's posts, mostly) and said what I think could be explanations of it. Nothing is secret knowledge. And what is so scummy about my posts? That I'm looking at what people say and vote and analyze it? Isn't that the definition of what the town is supposed to do? and I wholeheartedly agree that there are way too many quiet people letting the scum slip among them and hide. That's a big part of why I think people are perceiving me as scummy - because I ACTUALLY TALK and so there's stuff for you to nitpick at me? Frankly, Petr, I found your post scummy. You just vaguely brought up thin accusations other people made, complained about quiet people, placed an obvious vote, and contributed exactly ZERO to the scumhunt. In other words, exactly the sort of thing scum to do accuse townies and try to get them lynched. Easy, Easy! The traitor discussion whether there's one or not is taking a LOT of time and frankly the mechanics of the role are not super important. You have been one of the more vocal person in regards to the traitor role and as such (as you accuse me of doing) contributed little to the scumhunt. What other points am I supposed to raise? Where else am I supposed to vote? Your 'case' and justification for your vote is exactly the same as mine ... but my vote is easy ... right? The choice is clear for everyone
mostlytechnic Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Easy, Easy! The traitor discussion whether there's one or not is taking a LOT of time and frankly the mechanics of the role are not super important. You have been one of the more vocal person in regards to the traitor role and as such (as you accuse me of doing) contributed little to the scumhunt. What other points am I supposed to raise? Where else am I supposed to vote? Your 'case' and justification for your vote is exactly the same as mine ... but my vote is easy ... right? The choice is clear for everyone 1. Yes, the choice for lynch today is easy. Not denying that. 2. I'm not complaining that you voted for Mist - go re-read what I said. It's an obvious vote, that's why I made the same thing. 3. Your accusations against me were crap, that's what I was protesting. You mimicked other people's weak accusations (trying to make them legit just by repeating the same junk), made up things (secret knowledge? really?), and just threw mud at me. That's not scumhunting, that's acting scummy. 4. What else are you supposed to do? I don't know, look at what people said on day 1 and 2? See how they voted? Like I did in analyzing Jarl's votes against Crane? Yep, it's harder when 3 of us (me, pudding, and mist) have made half of the posts for today. So that means everyone else is being too quiet, not that we're too talkative! So prod them, accuse them.
Lady K Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 I have already given reasons on Day 1 and Day 2 of my vote for Mist, Vote: Mist (Mencot) However, Mund the Strange is getting stranger with every post and this one really bothers me. Pudding head, um, but no, they don't. I've said over and over. When I was talking about a traitor, I wasn't thinking of the "official" mafiascum role. In my mind, based on Jarl's posting, I was assuming there might be a recruit role in the scum where the "traitor" is a townie who gets converted once they and the scum hook up. That's basically what we had in a previous life where I was a scummo. In that case, I don't think the "traitor" knew anything. But it's certainly conceivable (and apparently Jarl thought this, assuming his asking for someone to PM him was legit) that the recruitable person knows they're recruitable and so they're looking for the scum at the same time as the scum are looking for them. My whole point was just that IF this happened and IF someone was converted from town to scum (as implied by Jarl's posts), then that should be considered when looking at anything the investigator has done. The exact details of the role are really pretty irrelevant to that point. Here you say you confused the role of traitor with that of a townie that can be recruited to the scum side. However you have had past lives where both of those roles were active, so you should know the difference. Remember poor Monty on another boat? There was a traitor in that life. And remember Maurice who was involved in politics? The was a recruitable townie roll in that one. So why would you mix the two up?
Mencot Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 The who is going for lunch today is pretty clear but what you people should start doing is to actually start searching for the scum. The killing will not stop with my lynch because I don´t have anything to do with those, what you will figure out tomorrow and the next day if you don´t find the killers quick. There is with big likeness a scum among your early "town block". I have noknowledge of who could be scum in this game, almost everybody has been acting scummy in away or the other, so far. Well, it all seems too easy. I can think of several ways kills could go missing and Mist still be town. But it seems Mist couldn't. So this lynch is testing a theory. It's the simplest explination, we'll see how it pans out. Stop twisting my words.
Piratedave84 Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 3. Your accusations against me were crap, that's what I was protesting. You mimicked other people's weak accusations (trying to make them legit just by repeating the same junk), made up things (secret knowledge? really?), and just threw mud at me. That's not scumhunting, that's acting scummy. I really don't have a problem piggybacking someone's theory if I feel it's on point which is wha I did here. It's not so much the 'secret knowledge' (BTW where did you get that from) as the amount of time you spend explaining different definitions of the role; it's useless and does not add to the conversation besides keeping us focussed on a relatively irrelevant detail. 4. What else are you supposed to do? I don't know, look at what people said on day 1 and 2? See how they voted? Like I did in analyzing Jarl's votes against Crane? Yep, it's harder when 3 of us (me, pudding, and mist) have made half of the posts for today. So that means everyone else is being too quiet, not that we're too talkative! So prod them, accuse them. Am I not doing this right now? Congratulations on making several posts; like Mist, you are now confirmed town. SNIP Stop twisting my words. It's not so much twisting; more like trying to make sense of them ...
Mencot Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 It's not so much twisting; more like trying to make sense of them ... You don´t even know what was meant with that, so why comment on it? Not much contents in your words either, Day 1 Hum .... So while we're focusing on the who-said-what aspect of the discussion, it dawns on me that a portion of it went unanswered/was overlooked a bit; why would you know/think there are traitors and why would you allude to being one in the first place. This is not something we see too often and I'm curious as to why it was brought up. I seems to me that it was initally Tarben who was probing Brand to see if he could recruit him; or is this a conclusion Brand drew and then discussed with you? It also seems as though Brand was trying to probe you to see if his concusions could lead to a lynch "Herburt Marred-Eye had mead hall EIEIO In that hall there were scummos EIEIO Here a ping, there a ping, everywhere a ping-ping" Please tell us why it is that Tarben was so up front with you ... I can't conceive that someone would be so bold as to say "hey! I'm scum" on day one UNLESS they had very good reason to do so. I'm going to Vote: Brand (Brickelodeon) for a few reasons: 1) As someone metionned earlier, I fear his behaviour will continue to get worst, or at least remain as flippy-floppy, and will undoubtedly become a burden on the group. 2) All the changes in his defence/explanations/PMs is making me uncomfortable 3) What's wrong with your quotes dude; just quote the post. Wow .... you really, really like Cranebeinn don't you!!! Why was it necessary for you to defend him twice in one post? Day 2 (and what a lame one it was from you, probably busy weekend but also flying under the radar.) One down! Not so bad for a first day!!! What a weird thing to say; care to elaborate? I have a few seconds to post while I have wi-fi; I asked Pudding Head to proxy vote (if 1-voting is mandatory and 2-proxy is allowed) on my behalf should I not be back in town by day's end. I'm back, looks like I have a few hours to read the thread and make my mind up. I'll be back in a few I read/skimmed the thread and I want to vote: Mist (Mencot) for being a scumbum and an incredible annoyance. Sorry my vote does not have more substance than that but I really did not follow the discussions. Well ... unvote: Mist (Mencot) And vote: Jarl (jluck) I've never seen anyone claim scum before ... This is ducked! For day 3, all that wanna, can go back and read. So yea, low posts full of fluff ecuals loyal town
Piratedave84 Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Garbage LOL I don't know what to say ... Vote for me if you feel I'm so scummy
Tariq j Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Vote: Mist (Mencot) Very simple reasoning here, Mist was blocked and we have a missing night kill.
Mencot Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Vote: Mist (Mencot) Very simple reasoning here, Mist was blocked and we have a missing night kill. You will see your reasoning when Iam lynched and someone will be killed. LOL I don't know what to say ... Vote for me if you feel I'm so scummy Maybe I will.
CMP Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Maybe I will. The mere threat of your vote sends a cold shudder down my spine...
KotZ Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 Vote: Mist (Mencot) As everyone has said, you've been acting really scummy the past two days. We'll find out tomorrow, but I feel like we'll all not be surprised when you turn up scum.
Mencot Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 The mere threat of your vote sends a cold shudder down my spine... What make me shudder is that, it is day 3 and almost everyone has stopped talking, just waiting on my lynch. This is something Munud pointed out also! What is up with you people, what are you going to do tomorrow... continue the wasted talk about traitors? Vote: Mist (Mencot) As everyone has said, you've been acting really scummy the past two days. We'll find out tomorrow, but I feel like we'll all not be surprised when you turn up scum. I bet you will be surprised in someways
Hinckley Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 You will see your reasoning when Iam lynched and someone will be killed. I'm sure the Scum kill will be passed on. Or are you a Serial Killer? What make me shudder is that, it is day 3 and almost everyone has stopped talking, just waiting on my lynch. This is something Munud pointed out also! Has all of your talk gotten is anywhere? And yes, the similarities between you and Munud have been duly noted.
Mencot Posted July 15, 2015 Posted July 15, 2015 I'm sure the Scum kill will be passed on. Or are you a Serial Killer? Has all of your talk gotten is anywhere? And yes, the similarities between you and Munud have been duly noted. *us Maybe not But neither will not speaking bring anything to this case! I will give you something to talk about, Drum rolls....... Just a sec Are you ready Still there seriously Still there, waiting
Recommended Posts