Rockband Mini Mafia

On September 18 2012 08:57 Blazinghand wrote:


I think you're scum

##unvote
##vote: iamperfection

On September 18 2012 06:46 marvellosity wrote:
P.S the whole point is that iamp's suggestion wasn't random, so we already have a liar. LAL?

On September 18 2012 09:35 Hapahauli wrote:


Geebus why are you flipping out?

On September 18 2012 09:36 Mementoss wrote:


Well, that means it isn't random because it was pre-meditated and thought out. Sooo, yeah.

On September 18 2012 09:38 Hapahauli wrote:


"you case on prplhz is shit. a fucking meta case on 1 post come on."

Seems very unnecessarily critical/harsh/attacking. Like I don't think his case is good either, but that's just over the top and scummy imo.

On September 18 2012 09:48 Blazinghand wrote:




OK obviously this isn't an accurate representation of what you think, since it's more HOW people react that what their reaction is that determines scumminess (ie you could have a weak, well-reasoned reaction or a strong, well-reasoned reaction). The purpose of this chart is that you're framing your critique of these players wrong. The problem isn't that iamperfection reacted too strongly to my case, it's HOW he reacted too strongly. After lurking and being called out for it by me, after I've moved my vote off prplhz, THEN he strongly condemns my case (without really great reasoning) with swear words.

This is why iamperfection's reaction is bad. it's not that he strongly disagrees with my case-- after all, you did as well-- it's HOW he agrees. it's phony.

On September 18 2012 09:55 Mementoss wrote:


Answer this, why would scum make their first post that? It obviously wouldn't do anything towards getting Marv lynched. It would only bring negative attention towards himself.

On September 18 2012 21:46 marvellosity wrote:


Rereading the thread, and I need to comment on this. Random lynch isn't coming in to the thread and going "let's lynch this guy."

You should know this VERY WELL having seen how Palmar went about it; he proposes a methodical method where we all go to some website he set up or some shit and roll a RNG. The point of Palmar's random-lynch is that it is demonstrably random to the whole thread. Yours was not demonstrably random.

On September 18 2012 22:17 Ange777 wrote:
How about you give your own scum reads iamperfection?



Why so scared?

On September 18 2012 10:50 Zephirdd wrote:
HEY GUYS

Sorry it took you so long. So, are you familiar to the Zephirdd Rule®?
This is how it works.

"The person that thinks the bullshit from a first post to be scummy is almost certainly scum."

Maybe my english here isn't perfect. Anyways, we had our pretty iamperfection throwing his random vote right? Yeah that's some bullshit.

Then we got a series of responses from players all dismissing the random vote, but one of them rings my bells:



This is the only player at that point that decided to use this random lynch as a reason to vote iamperfection(even if he doesn't actually vote him). So right now, my first reaction is that Hapahauli is trying to take them guitars from da band.



##Vote hapahauli

On September 18 2012 11:52 Zephirdd wrote:


let's look at this post for instance. This is a confirmation bias-kind of post, but it in no way means anything to IAMP's alignment. In fact, it is just another null tell. Yet for some odd reason that I can't think of, someone cursing at a case(made by BH of all people) is somehow over-the-top scummy

See this is the issue here: Hapahauli finds something on IMP's post and thinks it's scummy.

The funniest part of this all(that I just realized)? He never voted IMP! Even though he proposes imp's lynch twice(first after his random vote, then now by saying he is over-the-top scummy), he is set on mementoss. His reasoning is explained as mementoss being 'wishy-washy' on almost less evidence than BH himself!

Finally, dismissing a case = defending the player. If you are going to dismiss a case, you either provide solid evidence(more than 'this case is bad because it is not researched enough' even though it had 3 months worth of research) or you show why the attacked player is townie.

Oh and finally

Is NOT at all part of my case. I never, EVER, mentioned that you voted him. I mentioned that you proposed that he is a good player to be lynched after his BS from the first-post(which in turn leads you to be eligible to the Zephirdd Rule). Who is not reading?

On September 18 2012 13:40 Zephirdd wrote:
tbh hapa, there is very little that would change my mind coming from you.
How do you go from over-the-top scummy into 'leaning scum'?



I am suggesting that you should push your scum read when you have a freaking scum read.

Your case on him is that you think he is wishy-washy. that's it. Apparently, being wishy-washy day1 is scummier than the over-the-top scum. Before you say it, I'm not misrepresenting anything here.

On September 18 2012 23:22 mkfuba07 wrote:
At the moment I'm opposed to voting for Zephirdd just because I think he really wants his "rule" to become a thing. Right now I think his case is full of confirmation biases (reminds me of my case on Z-BosoN from LVII). I don't think his case against Hapa has any merit, but I also don't feel that the case was scum-motivated.

On September 18 2012 23:41 Ange777 wrote:
@iamperfection:

Where is Zeph defending you?

On September 19 2012 00:07 Ange777 wrote:
Mementoss did defend iamperfection whereas Palmar simply gave him town cred for apparentely no reason. But iamperfection himself had commented on Mementoss' defense so of course I am asking for his stance on Mementoss.

On September 18 2012 09:55 Mementoss wrote:


Answer this, why would scum make their first post that? It obviously wouldn't do anything towards getting Marv lynched. It would only bring negative attention towards himself.

On September 19 2012 02:53 prplhz wrote:
I voted you now didn't I?

On September 19 2012 06:54 prplhz wrote:

I have some small reservations with the marvellosity lynch that I can tell you about later but for now he's my top candidate.