Mafia in the Himalayas - Page 91

On June 19 2015 04:55 GlowingBear wrote:


I'm fighting this temptation of lynching LS since he has a big filter, but oh boy, that vote on me was bad.

On June 19 2015 02:00 wherebugsgo wrote:


or, you know, the fact that this is a retarded opinion if you are town and actually incredibly indicative that you are scum

Let's break it down. From a GB=town perspective first: it's not at all helpful because you eliminate entire possibilities when scumhunting and you invite scum to be more active by saying, "oh if you're more active we won't lynch you!" Townies, on the other hand, are not going to give a shit because they will continue to play like they will play and they could honestly not give a fuck what a player like you thinks. Indeed this is one of the biggest problems with using surface-level things like activity to attempt to scum hunt because you end up shooting yourself in the foot. You maybe catch the low activity scum if you are lucky or manage to use other clues to find them but it is incredibly rare that you can nail an entire team or even a significant portion of a team that way. It certainly wouldn't have worked in the game we played in together where you were scum, where all 3 scum members were active (AND YOU SHOULD FUCKING KNOW THAT IF YOU ARE TOWN) whereas town almost mislynched into some dude that was going to get modkilled anyway, and all the other lynch candidates would obviously not have flipped town like Shockey and Shining and Tubesock and whoever else was in that game and was scummy.

So, if you are town in this game GB you should stop pushing anti town things and pushing like 7 different people with no reasons.

On the other hand if you imagine this from a GB=scum perspective this is actually really great for GB scum to say this. If GB scum says we're only lynching inactives, it's easy to get town support because no one likes inactives. Reading active people is hard so it's really easy to fake scum reads on inactive players. Indeed this fits best with GB's style this game because he asserts he is "reaction fishing" when in reality this is just a thin veil to look for town sentiment. Similarly in the previous game where he was scum, GB was more than willing to let LS, his scum teammate, live on day 1 but instead he wanted to push someone like Stutters who wasn't doing shit.

Why else would he ask me whether I would lynch VA randomly yet offer none of his own thought process? This in particular is very scummy because he was the one that prodded me for not providing opinions, yet when I do he offers absolutely nothing in return! At no point did GB actually make any sort of reasonable attempt to work with me despite claiming to want to do so. Indeed, he actually undermines what I am doing by saying that I am not attempting to get town to consolidate yet being the biggest offender by far of the very things he is accusing others of doing. Lastly, the whole "we're not going to lynch actives" thing is great for his scum style because as he proved in the last game, he is a very active scum player. When pushing the idea that we shouldn't lynch active players because it's a bad idea, he's masking his own style as scum because he himself is an active scum player. It's merely a stone that he is using to knock out multiple birds at once-it's a play in his own self interest in multiple ways.

That coupled with his complete lack of reads and reasons this game pretty much confirms he is scum.

On June 19 2015 02:09 NydusHerMain wrote:
I want to swap this to a bw on onegu but at the same time I'm okay with a bf lynch.

@bugs what's there not to get about what gb said? He's uneasy despite being one of the voters because it's got so many people voting on it whereas no one else is really up for vote consideration in comparison.

Gonna throw this out there and see if it sticks.

##Vote: onegu

If not, I'm fine with bf regardless.

On June 19 2015 04:57 NydusHerMain wrote:


Honestly lightning feels fucking fake as fuck to me in terms of tone and I feel like he's not angry after getting outed as pr and isn't really trying hard. W/e

On June 19 2015 04:57 ritoky wrote:


are you talking about this post ksc?

On June 19 2015 02:14 wherebugsgo wrote:


what doesn't make sense is the fact that he is uneasy about the lack of consolidation yet he does exactly what he claims is making him uneasy. He doesn't attempt to consolidate and instead his reads are constantly changing and he's adding new people he thinks are scum all the time.

e.g. why would he bother to say that he's going to write up a case on breshke? I feel if that actually gets posted it's going to derail the thread even further rather than give us any further indication on who is scum. Given that his vote is on BF I would expect him to try to convince the rest of us to consolidate on BF, because that's what he says he expects other people to be doing-consolidating.

It's also nearly impossible to know what he thinks because he refuses to work to flesh out reads despite claiming that it is what he wanted to do with me. He asked me maybe 2-3 one liner questions that ended up going nowhere because when I responded to him he gave nothing in return. That's quite odd for someone who claimed that collaboration is important in getting together a strong town day 1.

If he unvotes BF and ends up voting someone else this will pretty much prove what I'm talking about. He might OMGUS me or maybe he'll go through with his statement on Breshke but even now it doesn't appear that he was genuine about his talk about consolidation and about his talk about collaboration.

On June 19 2015 03:52 wherebugsgo wrote:


care to jog my memory? I recall you posting something pointing out the consolidation thing but you can pretend I'm a goldfish for the purposes of this exercise. I just want to know that you have real opinions I can trust.

But of course if you don't wanna play we can have it your way