Cultured Mini Mafia - Page 5

On February 26 2014 13:32 gumshoe wrote:


First day man, we bring up bad cases(which they almost all are at this point) then move on or evolve those cases. The only people who are scared of working through possibilities are scum, because it incriminates them and brings town closer to the truth. Also if you want you can sheep wos's complaints with the Suki's case, otherwise back up your declarations of war.

On February 26 2014 13:36 raynpelikoneet wrote:
gumshoe if suki had said she was a) nervous or b) baiting how would that have made her mafia?

On February 26 2014 13:39 gumshoe wrote:


It wouldn't, it would just get her to talk, which is something that asking "hey suki you maf?" would not acomplish. People on tl mafia always go ham with thier cases, I bilieve there is a middle route, that works partly because mafia are more likely to adress a non threatening case that most greens ,secure in their townieness, would choose not to.

On February 26 2014 13:41 raynpelikoneet wrote:
No actually Wave there is something behind this that i don't understand and gumshoe needs to explain. He is saying different things.

On February 26 2014 13:47 raynpelikoneet wrote:
No fuck.. Damn your posts are hard to read gumshoe. Wait a sec, i gotta read all of this crap again.

On February 26 2014 13:35 WaveofShadow wrote:

So which cases are not bad so far today?

Do you have a scumread yet?

On February 26 2014 14:11 raynpelikoneet wrote:

I retract from my townread on gumshoe.

On February 26 2014 14:13 raynpelikoneet wrote:


Okay two questions:
1) Why do you ask questions that have no purpose behind them? Townies do things for a reason, usually because they try to ask stuff that makes people reveal their alignment. What's your reason?
2) Where does suki's actual answer put her and why?

On February 26 2014 14:16 raynpelikoneet wrote:

I thought i knew what he was doing, apparently i didn't.
Also my read on Mocsta or anyone has nothing to do with their read on gumshoe (like i don't do connection cases - i didn't think yo uare scum because you think my townread is scum).

On February 26 2014 14:17 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Of course (1) is true Wave. As town you can always explain why you do stuff.

On February 26 2014 15:20 raynpelikoneet wrote:

Well that's why i said "misguided or "misguided" ".
I don't know what he is yet, if i had to say i'd say scum because he made really bad cases last game he was scum in but i need to see more from him.

On February 26 2014 16:18 Vivax wrote:


What I don't like about this post is that he can't simply say what he thinks about suki, but feels like has to put a Mocsta townread in front of it.

That reads to me like he feels pressured to overjustify for picking a side in the debate, which is something I could see scum doing in a town vs. town argument, after all you're always painfully aware that what you say just isn't right, so you need to create a story. And this looks like a story, the story of how you think suki could be scum ONLY after thinking that mocsta is town, which is something I don't see townies do at D1.

Explanation: Gumshoe feels that he can't attack suki without supporting Moc cause he thinks that he would look like his lacking suspicion of Mocsta was unjustified. Like, in a hypothetical town vs town argument as scum you would think that you can't attack one townie without clearing the other.

Moreover you can see that the part about Mocsta could be construed (in best-case scenario, ie gum town) as a justification for sheeping him ("but I feel good about his accusation not coming from a place of deceit"), but gumshoe doesn't exactly use Mocsta's arguments (tryhard looking posts, "why-not-vote-for-me-question") and brings his own, which strengthens the overjustification version of events.

The last bit with the nostalgia is either overanalyzing (if town) or making stuff up (if scum), so I think it should be disregarded entirely for now (@ geript).

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nitpicking from this case is strictly forbidden, either you address all points and give a conclusive opinion or your remarks will be ignored.