Personality Mafia 2 - Page 9

On March 15 2013 11:20 DarthPunk wrote:


No. Because I don't have any apart from those, and I'm not 100% on marv as it is. I am not going to fake some just because you are asking me.

On March 16 2013 00:48 marvellosity wrote:
slOosh, Vivax.

On March 16 2013 00:48 Vivax wrote:


This part is irrefutable. Foolish telling us how his role works was pro-town. Cora voting himself when he could have gotten others lynched wasn't scum agenda.

On March 16 2013 04:37 austinmcc wrote:
marv, take a look at iamp's filter for a second.

Blind yourself to the bits where he supports you. Blind yourself to the parts where his reads line up with yours A LOT of the time.

Is town iamp....this unfocused? Some may be roleplaying, but actually read his filter critically. Especially during D2 when the thread didn't need any help being a mess. He's got a couple reads, and he talks about those when they come up, sometimes, but he just never ever goes out of his way to START anything. He never goes out of his way to comment on anything that isn't being commented on, and he's got NOTHING as far as...half or so of the thread is concerned.

It's all so short and terse that I can't get much from it, besides some associative stuff once we have more flips. But...is this iamp?Thinks you're town. You parity checked those two as different. You telegraphed that, so decent chance there was a frame, but he wants to lynch both. No comment ever on whether he thinks there's a cover ability or something, he just doesn't update his read AT ALL from both scum during N1 --> opposite parity check from someone that seems to be a major town read.

On March 16 2013 04:46 austinmcc wrote:
In case that quotes bit was unclear, here's what I'm getting at.

iamp N1 has both Foolishness and Ver in his scum list
marv D2 comes back with a parity check on those two as different
iamp strongly believes marv to be town

iamp continues to push both Foolishness AND Ver. He does not explain why he does not trust the check.

That's fine, in and of itself. There were a lot of comments in the thread about how the check was telegraphed, and so there could be a frame or a rb. But we know marv wasn't roleblocked (PARANOIA PARANOIA: IF HE'S TOWN (WHICH HE PROBABLY IS)). And if the checks came back different, that means a frame doesn't explain both being scum.

If both were TOWN, you could frame one, have the parity check come back different, and lynch them BOTH. Get rid of 1 of 2 big scary players that you would not want to face as scum.

But if both were SCUM, you can't frame them to make the parity check come back different. You'd need a cover ability, or a framer that specifically can do both, which MIGHT be the case. Or a gf, which MIGHT be the case.

iamp just jumps into wanting to lynch BOTH players though. Despite the parity check, despite a roleblock not occurring, despite a regular frame + the check indicating that both are actually TOWN. So he's relying on one of them being a gf or one of them being covered, but nobody is really discussing those powers and he doesn't see fit to mention. He just carries his night scum reads over to day, without taking into account a parity check that a big town read got back.

Scum. Dude scum.

On March 16 2013 04:49 austinmcc wrote:
Yeah, but earlier. I read you over a couple times and felt a little better, was worried about the drop in activity, and was hoping to get you more involved so I could reassure myself further.

Like...supersoft, during yesterday, went from you being super super townie to moving you down his list. You were noticeably absent. Even if the rhymes are sometimes painful, you seem to be forced to condense your thoughts down and give short thoughts/directions. It works well, and we could use more of it.

What do you think about this iamp bit?

On March 16 2013 04:59 austinmcc wrote:
And the check is important, and maybe overblown here, because this feels true. It's one of the few things that makes me go "hmmmm" in iamp's filter, the other stuff is often just so cursory.

On March 16 2013 05:14 iamperfection wrote:

I think I have said fool for a gazillion times

On March 16 2013 05:25 marvellosity wrote:


Just take a browse through Crossfire's filter and look at the quality of his posts.

Remember in PU he had a mason claim in his back pocket.

On March 15 2013 12:08 cDgCorazon wrote:
GG =)

On March 16 2013 06:19 marvellosity wrote:


I agree with this assessment. Probably town, to be looked at again if other more likely options go awry.

On March 15 2013 11:05 Vivax wrote:


The timing to say this is pretty scummy given you've almost not been pushing anything this day.
The timing to say this is scummy if Cora flips town, that is.

On March 16 2013 07:38 slOosh wrote:
Uhh I probably should have did a proper final edit instead of making many little edits, so a couple of sentences may seem leapish. An underlying thought through the case is (may or may not be explicit I edited a lot):
I characterize stutters as a newer player, excited pregame but no excitement after game starts, whose thought processes' fit more aligned with a very mature mafia player, i.e. is unnatural.

On March 16 2013 07:53 slOosh wrote:

? If he is more of a newer player than it is more disturbing the things he says.