Newbie Mini Mafia XXXI

On November 16 2012 00:08 Djodref wrote:
Don't let him claim VT first

By the way, it was a really nice move and really helped us a lot to solve the game and it is fucking hilarious when you read it again

On November 25 2012 11:33 Oatsmaster wrote:
I think that accurate day 1 reads are difficult to make due to the low sample size and if we lynch the lurkers, everyone has to contribute which will help in making more accurate reads.

On November 25 2012 13:23 Oatsmaster wrote:
I got a scum feeling from cheesecake with his first 2 posts, I suggest we lynch him

On November 25 2012 12:00 Oatsmaster wrote:
Yes totally agree with Cheesecake.
only 5/9 are here, where are the rest

On November 25 2012 13:23 Oatsmaster wrote:
I got a scum feeling from cheesecake with his first 2 posts, I suggest we lynch him

On November 25 2012 14:37 yamato77 wrote:
Why don't you give us your actual input on Cheesecake?

On November 25 2012 23:26 Oatsmaster wrote:
LOL kickstart learning from the vets huh.
there are like 4 pages of content, I challenge you to find a case out of that.
A proper case that has scum reasons for certain posts.
ok about cheesecake


1.) This post looks like he is being light-hearted, especially with the Pie and Cheesecake question.
I feel that it is an act, the post looks VERY deliberate in being casual.



2.) Then here, a reason for people to be lurking is because we havent called them out. He basically says, I will lynch a lurker/anybody. Which is good reason to hop onto any bandwagon that is benefical for scum. Like lynching an inactive town/active but bad town

On November 25 2012 14:57 Aquanim wrote:
Sure, he's made all of four five posts so far so don't expect anything insightful.



I'm not liking this. In the first quote Cheesecake took, Oatsmaster is agreeing with this post:



which is pretty generically town-speech stuff from Mr. Cheesecake. I could well see Oatsmaster agreeing with the body of this message, BUT not liking the fact that Cheesecake is making speeches rather than poking people and looking for scum. (I'm taking a wild guess at what Oatsmaster's feeling was based on here.)

And apart from Cheesecake's questions in his first post and contentless sniping at Oatsmaster since that's all there is.

On November 26 2012 00:36 Oatsmaster wrote:
Cheesecake, you completely miss the point about the first post.
I said you are TRYING too hard to be casual and it ends up looking fake. So therefore you are scum trying to gain town image by starting a discussion.
However, the discussion has nothing to do with scum reads and such, it is basically fluff that you want from your questions.
so I think that you are scum because you APPEAR to be helping town when in actual fact, you are putting up a facade.

On November 26 2012 02:23 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:


Anything from your earlier newbie games you've learnt about what style to play yourself? Do you see any mistakes you made in those games? I'm not talking about VT claiming but more general stuff.

On November 26 2012 03:02 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:


And did that lead you to make any adjustments in your style for this game?

On November 26 2012 03:19 HeloKnight wrote:


The mafia has to implicate townies as scum and, using good logic, they can only convict other scum. So doesn't scum have to use terrible logic? Otherwise they with only catch their partners.

On November 26 2012 03:40 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:


In what way did it help your scum mentality?

On November 26 2012 04:59 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:
The reason I'm asking all these questions and why Mr. Cheesecake's play makes me feel uneasy

Part 1

In XXIX: CC was scum and all uptight, just like he said in one of his responses itt. After the game, his scum buddies said he was a funny guy cracking a lot of jokes in the scum QT. It's quite obvious CC wasn't being himself in the actual XXIX game thread, the real CC isn't uptight.

In XXX: CC was town and the complete opposite of uptight. It was obvious he was being his real self, ie what he had shown in the scum QT in XXIX. This complete change of meta was why I gave him a 100% town read in the obs QT. BUT this play style got him lynch. Cracking jokes and being a goof got him into a shitty situation which lead him to a weird VT claim and later a mislynch.

What would one expect town CC to take away from this? He needs to lay off his goofy style or he risks getting mislynched. What would one expect scum CC to take away from this? He needs to be more of a goof, otherwise the difference in meta will give him away.
[b]

If you compare this game to his town play in XXX, he's more serious business now. That would lead me to believe either a) he's town and has realized his style in XXIX didn't work and he needs to play a bit more "serious" or b) the reason he's playing closer to his scum meta is because he's scum.

Now I agree with what Oats said, CCs initial posts in this thread come off as "forced casual". That is, b) is quite possible: He's scum, has realized he needs to emulate his town play style, but doesn't really succeed. Besides, by asking these questions, I really gave him the chance to give me the a) explanation, but he didn't. He even says it hasn't affected his town play at all, which I find weird considering how he crashed and burned in XXX. He says, however, that it has affected his scum mentality. The reason he knows may be because he's playing scum right now.

My "goofy style" didn't get me lynched. I got myself lynched by trolling and claiming VT for no reason at all. XXX I barely consider a game, and it was my first as town. I didn't learn anything from that game other than what I told you.

This meta argument is funny, because it can go either way. If I played like I did in XXIX, I would be shamed for going back to my scum meta. I'm not excessively trolling like in XXX because I actually have a clear head for this game. I'm just going to be myself.

I didn't learn much in XXX because I pretty much killed myself to reveal scum. The only thing I learned in XXIX was how to play scum, so of course that game only effected my scum play.

Part 2

When you play as scum, you really don't want to butt heads with the stronger players. When I was scum in XXVIII I soon came to realize it would be in my best interest to agree with DarthPunk and Z-Boson because they pursued their scum reads aggressively. Now maybe I'm full of myself, but having played 3 games I would like to believe I'm one of the DPs and ZBs of this game, a player you want to get along with if you're scum. That's why this post by CC makes uneasy:



It is basically a carbon copy of my previous opinions/questions:





Being second on the ball to one of the stronger/more experienced players in this game is scummy. CC also kind of sided with me on the Oats issue, although his read is more on the null side. So yeah, I'm accusing him of cock-riding.

Honestly, when I woke up I glanced through the thread and right there at the end was Oat's vote post so I addressed it before looking at anything else. The previous night, I noticed that yamato in particular was just doing wierd one - liners that didn't do anything, but I wanted to see if he would post more while I was asleep. There wasn't much else to discuss anyway. Sure, I'll give you that I'm "second on the ball".

FOS Cheesecake

Cheesecake is my best scum read right now, but at least he's around and actually contributing. I'm absolutely capable of switching to one of you lurkers out there if I find a decent reason. There's also plenty of time of Cheesecake to convince me he's not scum, so go for it.

On November 26 2012 00:56 HeloKnight wrote:
Oats:




These posts are confusing. You say several times that you can't write a case from his posts thus far, in response to those asking you to explain yourself, but then you write a mini-case in the very same post. Why didn't you just write this case when people asked for it, instead of repeatedly saying that you can't write a case?



You say that "trying to look casual" is a scum trait, but your first few posts are looking pretty casual:


This post looks pretty "forced casual" too, but I don't know if smilies are the norm for Oats.


Why is "trying to be casual" a scum trait when you are clearly trying to be casual yourself?

On November 26 2012 03:19 HeloKnight wrote:


The mafia has to implicate townies as scum and, using good logic, they can only convict other scum. So doesn't scum have to use terrible logic? Otherwise they with only catch their partners.

On November 26 2012 06:18 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:
Missed this...



@CC

I thought you claimed VT because you had a decent amount of votes and/or suspicion against you. Was your claim entirely to exploit the lack of "regular fapper" info in OP?

On November 26 2012 05:34 yamato77 wrote:
Mr. Cheesecake is playing without contributing. He's written a lot, but most of it is absolutely useless to a town looking for scum. His policy discussion and talk about other mafia games he's played doesn't help hunt for other players, it seems like more of a defense for himself. Then he calls out two players, myself and Helo, trying to draw attention away from himself. None of this reads town to me, at all.

On November 26 2012 06:47 HeloKnight wrote:


I wrote up this comment on Oats because that was the only real interesting person at that time. While you had already brought up some of the stuff on his case and "forced casual", some of it was still new. No one had pointed out the apparent contradiction between Oats saying that he can't make a case and then making a case, and no one had pointed out that Oats' posts can be interpreted as "forced casual".



Part of the reason I asked that question is because everyone was getting on me to contribute more, but I wasn't finding a lot to comment on. So I asked this question because it seemed like SDM was reaching an absurd conclusion: that only townies will use terrible logic. You say that scum will be easily called out on using terrible logic, but then people like SDM will point out that scum will never use terrible logic, and the scum who used the bad logic is in the clear and looking more townie.

On November 26 2012 05:34 yamato77 wrote:
Mr. Cheesecake is playing without contributing. He's written a lot, but most of it is absolutely useless to a town looking for scum. His policy discussion and talk about other mafia games he's played doesn't help hunt for other players, it seems like more of a defense for himself. Then he calls out two players, myself and Helo, trying to draw attention away from himself. None of this reads town to me, at all.

On November 26 2012 23:10 yamato77 wrote:
It seems like most people that have posted opinions about me that are negative have done so while quoting or referencing the earliest part of my posts, so I guess I'll explain my thought process behind them. Early on, it became apparent to me, as I believe it did to Oats, that literally everyone was either not online at all or not posting intentionally. Most of my posts were in response to other people. If you'll notice, one of them was in response to CC asking me what I thought of him. I said



Perhaps I should have explained then, but I meant that I didn't like the way he entered the thread. His little questionnaire was really, really pointless. It seemed to me at the time something that a mafia player might do to appear to be "starting discussion" without putting anything of real value in the thread.

Thus, I limited my posting intentionally as to not really do anything except react to other people and try to get them to give information. Aqua was willing; I asked him his thoughts on me and Cheesecake and he gave them, without any questions. It was then that Cheesecake asked me my opinion of him, and I gave the aforementioned answer. Then he asked me what I thought the discussion should be about, and I told him, I thought us (Aqua and I) talking about whether he was acting suspicious was fine. I called out Oats for calling him scum, which I was not ready to do without more solid evidence, and have not done so yet.

My next post received a lot of heat. I posted my ill-timed opinion of Mr. Cheesecake. I was being honest. 1)Nothing looked like worthwhile contribution up to that point, to me. It still doesn't. He says he has contributed, but I don't see anything except a poor read on Helos he backed away from, continually attacking me for voicing my opinion of him, and defending himself. He has posted no other reads on anyone else. 2)I keep saying these same things and they are still true.

I want to know what people think of me because I don't want to be surprised by more votes on me like I was with SDM's. 3)I didn't like his voting of me because I didn't think people would honestly give a scum read on me based on my posting up to that point. I suppose I was wrong, which is why I've since become much more forthcoming with my thoughts and motivations.

As far as reads on other people. Kickstarter's sheer aggression when defending Cheesecake against Oats is astounding. He uses vulgar language more than once and seems wholly preoccupied with Oats' vote being on CC. He doesn't even care if other people think Oats is scum necessarily, so why did he vote for him? 4)The play doesn't really make sense because all he did was cause a whole lot of uproar over a play that no one else saw as scummy. If anything, THAT seems like a scum play.

That being said, Oats is definitely not a town read. None of his posting is particularly forthcoming about his actual motivation. His vote on CC, while initially seeming like a pressure vote, hasn't been justified properly.

SDM and Aqua are probably town. They have posted the most real content up to this point and their arguments have been clearly motivated.

Helo is a less troll version of Oats. None of his play is backed with clear motivation, but it is not inherently scummy either.

If Jacob misspells my name one more time I will lynch him. In seriousness, I think he has posted a lot of fluff and rehashed arguments. 5)I am interested in who he reads as blue, though. I have a blue read too.

Munk-E is seriously lackluster. I would vote for him over CC if I made a choice right now. I don't like CC's play but I don't like how little Munk has contributed and how long he has lurked.

So to rank my reads from scummiest to least it would go:

6)Munk-E
Cheesecake
Kickstarter

(area of ambiguity)

Jacob
Helo
Oats

(/end area of ambiguity)

SDM
Aqua
Me

On November 27 2012 06:33 yamato77 wrote:
Most of this game up to a point my suspicions were solely on you. Honestly, the read I have on you isn't that scummy, but you just haven't given reads on anyone else but me. The fact that you're still on me is 100% tunneling, but I kind of doubt scum would tunnel me so hard day 1 if they knew me being lynched would flip serious heat on them day 2. But you haven't contributed anything else to the thread except asking a bunch of people questions about their own votes/reads, and that isn't a good thing.

On November 27 2012 07:10 yamato77 wrote:
Aqua has given thoughts on other topics besides kick.

If I read you as scum, then Oats is automatically less so because I highly doubt scum would do this to their partner day 1. But the possibility is that he is scum and you are not.

Helo hasn't exactly done anything particularly scummy even if Munk is town. He called out a lurker. A safe play, but not alignment indicative.

I don't even know why I type this. You aren't going to take anything I say seriously. You have tunneled me SO HARD this game. It's absurd. I'm frustrated because of futility in posting anything in response to you because everyone twists it into "defending myself" when I do things like this. It creates unproductive discussion about my intentions. Obviously I know they are town, but no one else believes me because YOU have managed to throw enough doubt on my alignment to make people see it as scum.

On November 27 2012 11:57 Oatsmaster wrote:
also to everyone who said that I tunneled CC, You do not understand what tunneled MEANS.

On November 27 2012 12:03 Oatsmaster wrote:
well. 1 down, 5 to go.

On November 25 2012 11:33 Oatsmaster wrote:
I think that accurate day 1 reads are difficult to make due to the low sample size and if we lynch the lurkers, everyone has to contribute which will help in making more accurate reads.

On November 25 2012 12:00 Oatsmaster wrote:
Yes totally agree with Cheesecake.
only 5/9 are here, where are the rest

On November 25 2012 13:23 Oatsmaster wrote:
I got a scum feeling from cheesecake with his first 2 posts, I suggest we lynch him

On November 25 2012 13:46 Oatsmaster wrote:
Im seriously not sarcastic.
Seriously.
Its a feeling, I cant base it off anything though :/

On November 25 2012 21:40 Oatsmaster wrote:
Kickstart, I am saying you OMGUS voted me. Which you did.
I would love to make a case on Cheesecake if he posted more than 10 posts...
My vote in cheese is based on FEELING. Your vote on me is because you think that my vote is bullshit. Therefore, you OMGUS me :l

On November 25 2012 22:47 Oatsmaster wrote:
OH YES FINALLY, you say why my behaviour is scummy. :D
My explanation is that his first 2 posts seem off. What do you want? Cheesecake posted less than 10 posts, how can you garner any evidence from that?

On November 25 2012 23:26 Oatsmaster wrote:
LOL kickstart learning from the vets huh.
there are like 4 pages of content, I challenge you to find a case out of that.
A proper case that has scum reasons for certain posts.
ok about cheesecake


This post looks like he is being light-hearted, especially with the Pie and Cheesecake question.
I feel that it is an act, the post looks VERY deliberate in being casual.



Then here, a reason for people to be lurking is because we havent called them out. He basically says, I will lynch a lurker/anybody. Which is good reason to hop onto any bandwagon that is benefical for scum. Like lynching an inactive town/active but bad town

On November 26 2012 00:36 Oatsmaster wrote:
Cheesecake, you completely miss the point about the first post.
I said you are TRYING too hard to be casual and it ends up looking fake. So therefore you are scum trying to gain town image by starting a discussion.
However, the discussion has nothing to do with scum reads and such, it is basically fluff that you want from your questions.
so I think that you are scum because you APPEAR to be helping town when in actual fact, you are putting up a facade.

On November 26 2012 10:40 Oatsmaster wrote:
I made that case so that you guys could see how bad of a case it was..
And it got bashed horrendously. Thanks for seeing my point of view.
Im still on the fence about Cheesecake because he hasnt actually posted any reads, just responded to people.
I am inclined to think that SDM is town because he made a longass post on CC.

On November 26 2012 16:05 Oatsmaster wrote:
I have a strong feeling that he is scum. I cant prove it due to having less than 10 posts to analyse.
On the fence means that I didnt see anything from him to change my vote.

On November 26 2012 16:28 Oatsmaster wrote:
nah, I think that he was kinda sad about the mafia game because he got played, so now he is trying to make sure that it doesnt happen to him again.

Looking through Cheesecake's filter right now.


This posts seems completely irrelevent, why post such a long post if you have a null read on them? To give you an excuse to get off their back.



Then he calls Yamato hypocritical when in fact, he is doing the same thing. He has not commented on either kickstart's vote on me or the other people on Yamato.

On November 27 2012 11:25 Oatsmaster wrote:
LOL ok nice job kickstart. vitrol and fire is a good way to play as town. :D
CC is unusually uncaring about my vote and the fact that no one thinks that I am scum/ he is town.
I think that the best lynch for today is Munk-e
##Unvote
##Vote: Munk-E

On November 27 2012 12:03 Oatsmaster wrote:
well. 1 down, 5 to go.

On November 27 2012 12:32 Oatsmaster wrote:
So vote CC anyone?
also yeah how the hell would I mispost that when the 2 sites look TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
Actually I think out of everyone who didnt vote for Munk-e, aqua looks the scummiest

On November 27 2012 13:08 Oatsmaster wrote:
the QT site and TL.
Google it.
Kickstart has been emotionally invested defending CC and attacking me. Scum will be more detached because they know that I am town and thus, are not as convinced.
Aqua is the only other dude so by process of elimination, he is the scummiest.
I will look through his filter later and see whats in there

On November 27 2012 16:12 Oatsmaster wrote:
So there is 1 mafia in kickstart or Aqua right?
Can you make a case on either one? I cant.

On November 27 2012 00:12 Oatsmaster wrote:
I am content to sit on cheese? I started the wagon.
So kickstart, who do you think is scum then? after your rant and hopefully your emotions are cooled

On November 27 2012 22:41 Oatsmaster wrote:
if scum kills tonight, 4 v 2. Mislynch 3 v 2, kill again, 2 v 2.
so yeah.. lets get working.

On November 27 2012 11:25 Oatsmaster wrote:
LOL ok nice job kickstart. vitrol and fire is a good way to play as town. :D
CC is unusually uncaring about my vote and the fact that no one thinks that I am scum/ he is town.
I think that the best lynch for today is Munk-e
##Unvote
##Vote: Munk-E

On November 28 2012 09:54 Oatsmaster wrote:
Too scummy to be scum is a fail argument.

On November 30 2012 09:05 Oatsmaster wrote:
CC is scum
I am going through this again.


Why would a townie be focused on blue/green rather than the actual roles? This reads like he already knew I was town and it turns out that I was blue.

Sorry, last thing I expected was for you to be blue (if you are). Nothing about your play indicates blue to me.



He cant give an explanation on why yamato and I are a scumteam so he drops it with no pressure whatsoever. He says me and yamato cant be scum because its too easy? WTF?

Lol. It seems too obvious. Personally, I feel at least one scum is sitting back this game with his feet propped up on a table somewhere with some








What a waste of space, getting town to waste time discussing Helo's whereabouts WHEN IT DOESNT MATTER.

Actually, it does matter. If someone is intentionally not posting, it's scummy. I brought it up because he wasn't doing much of anything. Only me and Jacob were even discussing it briefly. Obv fluff, right?

I find this post really fucking weird, Marv is the town coach so CC subtly references him HOWEVER, no one else the whole game has mentioned anything about the coaches. I think that Marv told him that tip after XXX where he crashed and burned.

He told me that in an earlier game via pm. I've also mentioned Debears a bunch of times in context of us being scum. We aren't allowed to talk about coaching anyway, so it doesn't matter.

On November 30 2012 09:32 JacobStrangelove wrote:
Wait he kept his vote on kick? I thought he did a big post against munk. That is a little odd.

On November 30 2012 09:48 JacobStrangelove wrote:
Everyone is watching ipl probably lol.

On November 30 2012 09:58 Oatsmaster wrote:
Yes it looks like I'm throwing shit around and seeing what sticks, but there is NO REASON for scum CC to push another lynch

On November 26 2012 18:42 Aquanim wrote:
In reference to the Yamato case, this post has been coming up:

When I saw this post originally, I thought the same thing that I've been seeing in your reads - that it seems like anxious scum.
This was in reference to a post I made which (among other things) said I was uneasy about yamato. However, yamato (and CC) had posted since my last refresh and I then posted that I'd been ninja-d a lot. I can well believe that yamato might have thought I'd made the second post because my uneasiness about him had been nullified.

Could well still be scum paranoia, but there's a reasonable innocent explanation too.

I'm still thinking about the rest of the case.

On November 25 2012 14:57 Aquanim wrote:
Sure, he's made all of four five posts so far so don't expect anything insightful.



I'm not liking this. In the first quote Cheesecake took, Oatsmaster is agreeing with this post:



which is pretty generically town-speech stuff from Mr. Cheesecake. I could well see Oatsmaster agreeing with the body of this message, BUT not liking the fact that Cheesecake is making speeches rather than poking people and looking for scum. (I'm taking a wild guess at what Oatsmaster's feeling was based on here.)

And apart from Cheesecake's questions in his first post and contentless sniping at Oatsmaster since that's all there is.

On November 27 2012 06:11 Aquanim wrote:


Kickstart's defence of Cheesecake wasn't limited to Oatsmaster's case - iirc he poked at the use of meta in your CC case, too. The combination of these two, and the lack of serious posting on any other topics really, is what's setting me off. I'm not quite as convinced as I was last night, but I certainly don't have any better reads.


Not sure I've read the case in detail, but with the natural suspiciousness on someone with two posts total it's not hard to make some kind of convincing case. I'm not saying Yamato is TELLING us anything more useful, but I just get the feeling that his posts are probing people a little more. Asking more interesting questions. It's a vague feeling though.

My vote stays on Kickstart... I'm beginning to see how he might do this as town, but I still think that what he's been posting would look awfully tempting as mafia. I think I might be missing something about Yamato that you are all seeing, but I don't have time to look at all of his posts in context right now. I'm not comfortable leaving a vote on Munk-E when his filter (and the substantiation of any reads on him) could quadruple in size.

Kickstart, if you're town, I expect serious and active scumhunting from you in the future.

See you on the other side.

On November 30 2012 10:06 HeloKnight wrote:
Buy one case, get two free: the Oatsmaster special.

On November 30 2012 10:24 HeloKnight wrote:
Why do you think that the Munk-E timeline was scummy? He gave some pretty useful information by putting the timeline out there, which could have been done by scum, but then he asks a question to everyone about their intentions in switching their votes. I don't see that as scumhunting instead of spreading suspicion. The only person I see him spreading suspicion on with that post is me.

On November 30 2012 10:46 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:


Are you suggesting scum would hardcore buddy eachother? Seems kind of unlikely.

On November 30 2012 10:53 Oatsmaster wrote:
D3 we lynch CC :D

On November 30 2012 11:13 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:


Isn't that just how he posts though?

Yeah, i can't even convince myself with that case ldo, I thought I'd just throw my thoughts out there.

On November 30 2012 11:26 Oatsmaster wrote:
I like how I voted for everyone at 1 point of time, makes me look really wishy-washy

On November 30 2012 11:38 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:


I was refering to my part of the case in particular, it's pretty terribad. There are some decent points made against him and I don't think Oats is scum. My reasoning kind of ends there.

On November 30 2012 11:40 HeloKnight wrote:

I thought we weren't asking for a counter claim, that was the whole plan.

On November 30 2012 11:39 HeloKnight wrote:

Can someone respond to this?

On November 30 2012 12:00 yamato77 wrote:
If Aqua flips town I will destroy you all D3.

On November 30 2012 12:11 yamato77 wrote:
Fucking absurd. Dumbasses, all of you.

On November 30 2012 12:21 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:


Question is, did it occur to the potential JK? Even though we said he shouldn't claim?

On November 25 2012 11:49 Aquanim wrote:
1) Zero
2) We should lynch the scummiest player. That being said, building up a wagon on a lurker and watching their reaction is an entirely acceptable means of finding the scummiest player.
3) Either suits... but this is truly delicious. Fortuitously, I will be eating some today.

On December 01 2012 12:46 Oatsmaster wrote:
Yay..
I think its safe to assume that scum has a roleblocker or else they wouldve killed me.
##Vote: Heloknight

On December 02 2012 02:32 Kickstart wrote:
First off I see Oats has made another one of his cases on me, a meta case at that. This is my second game, and my first game I was in a pretty "high-level" game, looking at how I played in my first game, when I had no idea what I was doing and when I was NOT in a noobie friendly game is not going to give you any information.

The reason I sat on Oats was because I felt he was scum, everything leading up to his claim and even his claim was scummy to me. Now I have to admit that it is very unlikely he lied (due to there never being a counter claim) and that I beleive he is the Doctor. At the time he was scummy (and Aqua was never really scummy to me, definitely not more so than players like Yamato, Jacob, Helo), so had I been awake I was not going to vote Aqua anyways. I have and will continue putting my vote on who I think is the scum.

And so what if I have only pushed my Oats and Yamato scum reads, they are who I found most scummy. Oats not anymore but still Yamato. Did I think other players were scummy? Yes. But those two stuck out for the entire game so that is who I focused on. I am really not going to defend my consistent voting record against all of your emotional last minute vote swapping that keeps getting townies killed. Again my vote always has, and always will be on my top scumreads.

As for a nolynch I am not so sure, my immediate thought is that it gives scum more time (because they will still get to use their NKs), on the other hand - if we have a cop, and he has found/can find both scum, then he can present his findings and the game is basically won.

On December 02 2012 03:16 Kickstart wrote:
I am not putting the blame on you because there are lots of people responsible, but you said it exactly right - that hitting scum would have been better, and in my opinion Aqua was not a scummy player and not someone I would have voted for.

For now all I have to say is be wary of anyone (LIKE CHEESE) saying they know who the scum are, because if you vote with him and are wrong (he is actually scum) then you fucking lose. His play recently is really suspicious to me, starts a wagon onto a town, gets the townie lynched, and then uses it as town cred and goes around making some absurd statement that he made an amazing D2 play and uses this position to push a vote onto anyone but himself - I call bullshit.

On December 02 2012 08:23 yamato77 wrote:
I don't understand this "confirmed townie" talk. No one is confirmed town until they flip.

On December 02 2012 07:02 HeloKnight wrote:
Yes, it was a 1.75 hour vote swap that I was opposed to for the first 1.5 hours. So in reality, it was a 5 minute time period for me to make the decision to switch. The fact that you throw suspicion onto me for this is ridiculous. As scum, why on earth would I switch? Everyone was telling the doctor/JK NOT to claim and everyone was saying Oats was really suspicious. When Oats flipped blue, I would have been under VERY LITTLE suspicion because there was no reason to trust his claim anyway, as you yourself said You say that scum doesn't care if Oats or Aqua is lynched, that is NOT TRUE. Scum would want the claimed blue and confirmed townie lynched 100%. There was no reason for me to hammer Aqua as scum.

On December 02 2012 08:50 yamato77 wrote:

Just because someone says they are blue does not make them blue. There might only be one blue and that person is letting these stupid claims go through.

It looks suspicious to just call Oats and Jacob "confirmed" right now.

On December 02 2012 09:01 yamato77 wrote:
And WTF at calling Aqua's lynch a "good" play. Lynching town is never a good play if you are town.

On December 02 2012 09:09 yamato77 wrote:

Losing a town player is NEVER beneficial for town. OATS ISN'T EVEN CONFIRMED.

Dude you sound so much like scum it's stupid.

On December 02 2012 09:12 yamato77 wrote:
Basically you are trying to turn around how bad your play was with these really bad assumptions you are making. Of course the dumbass who started a wagon on a town player would want to do this because it makes him look like he "saved" a blue. You're either scum covering his ass for a shit play or delusional.

On December 02 2012 09:16 yamato77 wrote:

This logic relies heavily on Oats actually BEING the doctor which is NOT confirmed. EVEN IF there are two blues, the other doc/JK could NOT want to counterclaim and have saved SDM N1 and been unable to N2.

If Oats is scum the play makes perfect sense which means Oats/CC scum team.

On December 02 2012 09:27 yamato77 wrote:

You are ASSUMING doctor would counterclaim. You are also ASSUMING that people would believe the counterclaim and actually lynch Oats, if the real doctor counterclaimed. If there even is a doctor at all. Cop/JK is a possibility even if there are two blues. This is not convincing enough for me to just take Oats as "confirmed doctor". The fact that you are taking it for granted based on these ASSUMPTIONS you are making is really suspicious.

On December 02 2012 09:38 yamato77 wrote:
EVEN IF Oats is blue and Jacob is blue, that STILL doesn't make your D2 actions any better. You are justifying them post-hoc which is totally a scum play. Better play would have been actually hunting scum instead of making up really terrible cases just to get Aqua lynched instead of Oats. It could have been a no lynch. I gave you guys the out and you actually responded that it "wasn't an option". Why? Your cases on Aqua were bad and players had reservations about voting for him but for some reason they did. You pushed the wagon real hard.

If you look at it from my perspective, that scum Oats claimed blue to save his own ass, and YOU started the wagon that ultimately did save him, then it looks hilariously suspicious. Unless you can prove with GOOD, SOLID logic that Oats is town then I remain unconvinced. I admit I might be wrong but there really isn't any evidence that this isn't the case.

On December 02 2012 09:45 yamato77 wrote:

Fucking liar.

On December 02 2012 09:51 yamato77 wrote:
Not only that but you kept posting shit about "all aboard the Aqua train"

Honestly who gives that little of a fuck about who gets lynched? It's all about saving Oats to you in that play. I don't see how a town player would want to mislynch another town just because he wants to save a "blue" that isn't even close to "confirmed" when he has railed on that player the entire game. I thought he was scum and the blue claim looked like saving his own ass. You thought he was scum beforehand and the blue claim actually changed your opinion on him? Is the lack of a counterclaim really that conclusive to you? Because it's not to me.

On December 02 2012 09:56 JacobStrangelove wrote:
Dude... scum probably know if I know it the only one that doesn't know it is CC I am not blue I am town. Yamato if you are cop claim I know I can confirm you blue.

On December 02 2012 11:03 Kickstart wrote:
You did say it was an "omfg super ultra mega awesome play right here", but have changed your story since everyone is calling you on how bullshit that is.

On December 02 2012 12:04 yamato77 wrote:

Same thing CC did. Stop being biased.

On November 30 2012 09:51 HeloKnight wrote:
After going through yamato's filter, I'm seeing some things that just don't fit. Early on, I was feeling newbie town from him, and the cases made on him didn't really address that possibility. Recently, he's been very aggressive, especially on the Oats lynch, not something I'd expect from a player who's felt new the whole game It's rather jarring going from his early game posting to his recent ones. I'm feeling one of Oats or yamato has to be red, but not both.. although I guess a bus wouldn't be a bad decision for a scum Oats.
That brings me to the vote. For reasons already stated by others, including general scuminess and lack of breadcrumb, I am skeptical of his claim. I've held off of voting because I was uncomfortable lynching a claimed blue, so I tried to see if yamato would be a better lynch for today. If yamato flipped red,we could somewhat clear Oats due to the aggressive tunneling yamato has been doing. But I can't fathom dealing with Oats in a LYLO situation. We'd practically be forced to lynch him anyway. So:

##Vote: Oatsmaster

On November 28 2012 08:00 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
SDM, don't be so pessimistic about the NK. I'm sure some doctor will come to your aid . Think you're too obvious the target to be shot in the face.

I really must agree with the terrible town play. Myself included with that lolmunk switch. Dthe fact that aqua parkedhis vote on kick is suspicious mainly because he dun give a fk who would be lynched. Ofc i knew that in xxix, and is the reason i forced myself to switch onto one of the popular two bandwagons, which i even used to defend myself later that game. Can't see the reason having a random vote out there is a good thing, other than to separate yourself from a town flip.

On December 02 2012 13:53 Aquanim wrote:
Like I said, no hard feelings. The more I think about it, the more I understand where you were coming from - it's just that from my perspective, knowing what I could and couldn't have done (for instance, I wasn't there to switch my vote from Kick when the D1 wagons got hot) it just seemed ridiculous.

I appreciate you just couldn't lynch Oats at that point (even though he's unlikely to save anyone again, conf. town is conf. town).

I lold though when I saw that you thought I had no original thoughts, and SDM thought I was too original.

On December 02 2012 14:07 Oatsmaster wrote:
Yeah I played so fucking bad.
I thought playing more actively would prevent me from getting blue sniped cause doc hasnt that much extra info that I can slip.