Noir Mini Mafia: Chapter 1

On March 26 2013 08:50 Ghor wrote:
/in

I agree to all the rules and activity requirements in the OP.

But phrase no in OP ((( sorry

On April 01 2013 00:47 Hapahauli wrote:
It's sunday here :3

Starting tonight @ 07:00 TL Time.

On April 02 2013 07:30 VisceraEyes wrote:
Okay, but policy-lynching them? That seems a little over-the-top in a 9 player game. Policy-lynching anyone in a 9 player game just seems like a bad idea. It's certainly something to factor in, but not killing someone over. In my experience, townies are more likely to lolhammer than scum are. Scum are generally much more careful in how they vote and if they hammer someone are much more likely to explain why thoroughly.

I don't support your policy.

On April 02 2013 07:40 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
Blah blah blah policy blah blah



Policy: Don't go full retard mode if you're town.

Savvy? You'd think this would be common sense by now.

On April 02 2013 08:04 Sylencia wrote:
Hello everyone, I hoped this would start over the Easter weekend but looks like I have to cut some Monster Hunter time for this instead :{



With regards to point 2, I thought that Instant Majority lynch is supposed to shy away from throwing votes around carelessly? Well, that depends on what you mean about throwing votes around..

On April 02 2013 07:58 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:


Be sensible about your hammer vote and explain it yada yada yada. You're policy lynch proposal is bullshit, because half the thread wouldn't follow through with it. How someone goes about voting and hammering is what should be looked at, not just "lol he emotionally hammered the townzorz must be scum"

Listen to the Mafia scumcast (Hapa had a bunch of stuff to say about British II in it pertaining to instant majority). Has a bunch of goodies in it.

On April 02 2013 22:27 AxleGreaser wrote:


+ Show Spoiler +

So if you are "not confident in voting him at the moment.".... what do ?

On April 02 2013 11:07 risk.nuke wrote:
Viscera. Tunneling isn't about time, it's about not having an open mind. You lashed out at me instantly and agressively for the smallest thing so clearly you're looking at me as if I am scum and are trying to find things things that are scummy about me to confirm that belief. Aka tunneling.

You want REAL scummy shit. Everyone that's not posting are scummier then those who are posting.
For 2, I personally think Hopeless1der look very uninterested in finding scum.

On April 02 2013 22:52 Sylencia wrote:Pressure votes work better if you're going to be around to take them off, otherwise it could end up being manslaughter in this game :\

On April 02 2013 18:53 Sylencia wrote:- Cheesecake: This filter looks atrocious in my eyes, casting an early vote with little thought, yet providing no substance while he's around. Not sure if trolling around is his meta but seems pretty scum from here.

On April 03 2013 00:10 Sylencia wrote:


In addition, how is his statement about accuracy there that relevant to what happened before it? Are you suggesting that he said it to set up a bus on his buddy, then you're saying that he did that to say RoL is scum, then retract it? I don't even understand what you're getting at here.

And at this point, no, he's played enough games where I don't see him making himself look suspicious 3 hours into the game. The case on him has its merits however I would rather first see more from the two I've heard least from today (Hopeless and CC) - moreso Hopeless because there's ever so slightly more from CC.

Ghor - now that I've said it what are your thoughts on risk then? Would you say he is scum or not? Would you end up backing a vote on him if the time came for it?

On April 03 2013 00:42 Sylencia wrote:
In any case ##unvote as I'm going to sleep now, but what Ghor is saying is becoming ridiculously stupid since he says risk is scum but doesn't want to have him killed. If you don't want your scum read to be killed what the hell do you want?

If I wake up and this stupidity continues I won't hesitate to vote Ghor.

On April 03 2013 04:09 VisceraEyes wrote:
I won't lynch Sylencia today. I DO want to know who Sylencia wants to lynch.

On April 03 2013 04:19 VisceraEyes wrote:
It's not a case, it's an observation that can be summed up as "Sylencia's read of CC has changed from lynchable to unvoting with CC not saying anything in between". I can see a town Sylencia becoming less and less sure of his read without help from CC, that's not scum indicative and it's your only point.

Why does his read change have to be scum motivated?