Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 2
Feb 2, 2009 22:15:34 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 2, 2009 22:15:34 GMT -5
Votes: Player | Vote 1 | Vote 2 | Vote 3 | Hal Briston | Mr. Special Ed | | | Hoopy Frood | | Aubby | | Kat | Mr. Special Ed | | | Natlaw | Mr. Special Ed | | | molefan | Mr. Special Ed | | | peekercpa | Mr. Special Ed | peekercpa | Parzival | Rysto | Mr. Special Ed | | | shaggy | Mr. Special Ed | | | sinjin | Mr. Special Ed | shaggy | |
Totals: Votee | Total | Voters (#1) | Voters (#2) | Voters (#3) | Mr. Special Ed | 24 (3) | Hal Briston, Kat, Natlaw, molefan, peekercpa, Rysto, shaggy, sinjin | | | brokentree | 3 (3) | | | | shaggy | 2 (0) | | sinjin | | Aubby | 2 (0) | | Hoopy Frood | | peekercpa | 2 (2) | | peekercpa | | Parzival | 1 (1) | | | peekercpa |
Not Voting: brokentree, Aubby, crazypunker, KidVermicious, Merestil Haye, misterblocky, Mr. Special Ed, Nanook, Parzival, Pollux Oil, roxis, TDPatriots
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 2, 2009 22:31:24 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Feb 2, 2009 22:31:24 GMT -5
you guys leave shaggy alone Your ugly scum bits are showing.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 2, 2009 22:41:11 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 2, 2009 22:41:11 GMT -5
So she was voting you for it, and you were voting zeriel for it, and now you want to show how she's bad for doing it even though you did it and voted someone else for doing it? I think you missed the part where I said, he also outted the masons with out everyone on agreement, what I even though aparently know one else see's it, a magic bag. Though I do have to say, I dunno why he is seen as not magic mbagging but she is. He wanted to hide his power so the scum would not be able to play around it and force a lynch or NK him. She hid her power so the scum would not play around it and force a lynch or NK her. And the differance is? ?? So it was not soley on one thing. You're twisting her words here. She's explaining why she both voted for Mitey and why she found it odd that you were so sure Mitey wasn't scum when you never even gave a reason why you felt this way. I don't recall any of the other one mason only voters saying they thought the other prime candidate was definitely not scum. What made you so sure? So let me get this straight when we put our reasons for finding one the most scummy, we should put all the reason's for every player here not be on that list? these post's are going to be really long but ok. But if they thought they were possibly SCUM, then why did they not vote them? Are we now to the point of not voting those we find suspicious? Also they never gave there reason for not finding them suspicious to vote them. Here look your self: KAT Gee I see nothing about why she does not find ed or zerial not suspicious enough to vote? Yet here you are accusing me of not pro-town for not putting why I did not vote mitey . And here you're just making shit up. I voted you because not only did you seem so cocksure that Mitey wasn't scum, but you seemed to think she could find a killer. Which was unlikely for a couple reasons which are still valid, and impossible for a reason I gave that turned out was invalid, but I didn't even find it out until the end of the Day. I did not vote you for only voting for one mason, and I never said I did. But now I'll add your incessant smudging (and your smudges are largely not even for accurate reasons) as a reason to vote for you. In fact, you just displaced aubby. So let me get this straight even despite the fact that WE KNOW she is a tracker and can track the scum mason to the scum hide out....that deos not mean she could have found out ANDY? ? Dude she told us she could, it is in the main thread, And her death proved it, so your still not wanting to believe it, is mind boggling. It say's she is a tracker, she track's the masons to find which one is scum. So why still argue over what is fact. And as for your vote on me, here let me quote your post: So you see how can you sit there and say you did not vote me soley on not voting her? and only voting one mason? When that is exactly what you said! You voted me because I only voted one of the masons. and the one I voted for was not mitey . Read it, it is your own words here, not mine!
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 2
Feb 2, 2009 22:43:49 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 2, 2009 22:43:49 GMT -5
otes: Player | Vote 1 | Vote 2 | Vote 3 | Hal Briston | Mr. Special Ed | | | Hoopy Frood | | Aubby | | Kat | Mr. Special Ed | | | Natlaw | Mr. Special Ed | | | molefan | Mr. Special Ed | | | Mr. Special Ed | shaggy | Aubby | Chocolate Chip Cheescake | peekercpa | Mr. Special Ed | peekercpa | Parzival | Rysto | Mr. Special Ed | | | shaggy | Mr. Special Ed | | | sinjin | Mr. Special Ed | shaggy | |
Totals: Votee | Total | Voters (#1) | Voters (#2) | Voters (#3) | Mr. Special Ed | 24 (3) | Hal Briston, Kat, Natlaw, molefan, peekercpa, Rysto, shaggy, sinjin | | | shaggy | 5 (0) | Mr. Special Ed | sinjin | | Aubby | 4 (0) | | Hoopy Frood, Mr. Special Ed | | brokentree | 3 (3) | | | | peekercpa | 2 (2) | | peekercpa | | Parzival | 1 (1) | | | peekercpa |
Not Voting: brokentree, Aubby, crazypunker, KidVermicious, Merestil Haye, misterblocky, Nanook, Parzival, Pollux Oil, roxis, TDPatriots
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 2, 2009 22:51:05 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 2, 2009 22:51:05 GMT -5
Shaggy: First off I'm not a touchy feely sort of chick. I have never, ever given {{{huggies}}} to anyone. "That sucks" is about the width and breadth of my emotions. If that really bothers you and makes you think I'm scum, well...that sucks. And for the last time, I wasn't going to vote you because you only voted for one of the masons. I was going to vote you because you didn't even seem to consider for a moment that Mitey might actually be scum. You want me to be blunt, well here it is: Either you knew more about Mitey's alignment yesterday than the rest of us did or you can't play in a game with Mitey in an unbiased way. Gee since I never voted ed would that mean him and I too can not play any more? or you were going to only vote mitey so therefore you can not with ed or zerial or kat with ed or zerial or... you get the point, with that logic no one should play with each other here any more. Every one her has talked to each other, whether it be FB, MSN, or something. SO everyone here can be giulty...and I find it offensive that you would have to sink to those depth's as to bring my marriage into the game. GO back and read FB LOTR's game, I was scum and offed her, so save the not wanting to play this game crap because of married, for some one else. Also you are ignoring the fact that you were going by your own words, only vote her...So i could say the same thing about you. did you have insider info as to why you would not vote zerial or ed ? or why you completly ignored my post last night and now about that? So that argument for me and mitey is a BS one cause the same can be used on you!
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 2, 2009 23:00:11 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Feb 2, 2009 23:00:11 GMT -5
Ok, there's a lot I don't grok in that last Shaggy post. But this bit completely confuses me quite possibly because of the wine.
I know there is a simple explanation and I am again not seeing the forest for the trees but, enlightenment please?
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 0:19:02 GMT -5
Post by KidVermicious on Feb 3, 2009 0:19:02 GMT -5
Ed is Andy on Facebook.
And I think that isn't the only confusion going on here, and I think this confusion may be causing a little unnecessary brouhaha.
Shaggy, I don't think you grok the mechanics of a Tracker role. Mitey would have given the moderator a target each night, and she would have seen what they targeted and/or who targeted them. The moderator has already told us that the scum do not pick an individual killer, ergo the scum kill is not "trackable", ergo there's no way Mitey could have outed Ed.
And the difference between Zeriels power claim and Miteys is that Zeriels was very unspecific, all he said was that he had a power of some sort and assumed that the other Masons did too. Mitey, on the other hand, claimed that she knew, or would know, something very specific, without saying HOW she knew it. Thats what makes her claim a magic bag, but not Zeriels'.
Duzzat make sense?
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 0:22:41 GMT -5
Post by KidVermicious on Feb 3, 2009 0:22:41 GMT -5
Also, I would like more people other than Roxis to chime in on the question I asked yesterday here: psychopathgame.proboards106.com/index.cgi?board=smashing&action=display&thread=729&page=17#39908Clearly we had a townie who was given the impression that scum designate the killer. I figured otherwise based on the (then erroneous) game color. Roxis came to the same conclusion. Now from my perspective, I see two townies (me and mitey) who came to opposite conclusions with seemingly the same information out there. (Though, she did know she was a tracker, and so might have assumed that scum designate, but that's a bit of a leap in logic for her if she did. It's not unreasonable to expect a designated killer, but to appear to be sure of it like she was, when the color could be interpreted otherwise.) I'll be honest, I didn't notice anywhere the moderator had said one way or another, so when Mitey claimed tracker, I assumed that the scum would have to pick an individual killer.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 1:26:41 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Feb 3, 2009 1:26:41 GMT -5
wait I'm confused
I thought it was said that the scum did designate a killer.
confusion Do scum designate a single killer?
I swear that was answered before in the positive.
*holds head in hands*
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 2:51:20 GMT -5
Post by harmless little bunny on Feb 3, 2009 2:51:20 GMT -5
wait I'm confused I thought it was said that the scum did designate a killer. confusion Do scum designate a single killer?I swear that was answered before in the positive. *holds head in hands* The mods said scum DO designate individual killers.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 2:54:01 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Feb 3, 2009 2:54:01 GMT -5
that's what I thought but kidv is saying the opposite
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 3:10:29 GMT -5
Post by harmless little bunny on Feb 3, 2009 3:10:29 GMT -5
I think you missed the part where I said, he also outted the masons with out everyone on agreement, what I even though aparently know one else see's it, a magic bag. Though I do have to say, I dunno why he is seen as not magic mbagging but she is. He wanted to hide his power so the scum would not be able to play around it and force a lynch or NK him. She hid her power so the scum would not play around it and force a lynch or NK her. And the differance is? ?? So it was not soley on one thing. Really? Did you even read people's arguments against you? You still have no concept of what constitutes magic bagging? Nobody voted you for only voting one. I only voted one. I gave my reasons for suspecting that one, but I also gave my reasons for suspecting the other two as well. I didn't have to vote them, but I gave my thoughts on them so that other players could learn my motives and also so that if I noticed something about the other masons that other town did not notice, they could use that information to make more informed decisions themselves. Everyone has their own reasoning and I will not vote someone for disagreeing with me, but if they are voting or not voting for reasons that appear to be scummy then I will vote them. You seemed to have inside information about Mitey. Not because you didn't vote her, but because you never discussed anything about her. You didn't tell us why you never suspected her. Vote Ed 1 for obvious reasons. Vote Shaggy 2 For above. Aubby would be my third vote right now, but I don't want complete votes yet. I discussed my reasons for mistrusting her earlier. She just seems like she is going out of her way to make it seem like she doesn't know what's going on and therefore how to contribute to discussions. Nobody really knows what's going on, but we are trying to get as much information as possible through discussion. Not know what is going on is a poor reason for non-participation. *just so everybody knows: My work schedule is changing. I am switching from nights to days and I will have more supervision at work, meaning that I won't be able to play from work anymore. My hours of play will be changing. I might not be able to play as often, but I will still contribute.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 6:31:12 GMT -5
Post by harmless little bunny on Feb 3, 2009 6:31:12 GMT -5
From what I gather from a quick google search, it's a corruption of the phrase "Tiers Don't Exist". I don't quite understand what the original phrase is supposed to refer to, nor why people bastardized it, but there you go. I know I got in trouble before for posting color related stuff, but basically 'Tiers don't exist' is the goal of the SSB franchise. They want all of the characters to be perfectly balanced. The theory is that in a match of players of equal skill all characters would have an equal shot at winning. The problem is that it is impossible to tell if it is perfectly balanced because certain players prefer certain characters and some players are better than others. It may seem like Pikachu is unstoppable when you play with your friends, but he could be dominated easily in another group because people play differently. People make tier lists mostly off of tournament results. The characters who won the most tournaments became the top tier. The ones who won some tournaments became middle and the ones who won very few were lower tier. It can be skewed though, because some characters are just more popular to begin with. Melee was the first to claim that tiers didn't exist upon release. The characters were supposed to be perfectly balanced. In fact, there ended up being 5-6 tiers. Fox was widely considered the best character because the players who were winning tournaments were almost all using fox as their character. He was very fast and had some very good 'finishing moves.' He also had moves that could be used in ways that weren't planned for at the game release including the infamous 'shine' move which made him an extremely tough competitor in the hands of a skilled player. The characters are close enough that the players skill will almost always make up for a tier difference. Also, once players learned advanced techniques such as the wave dash and short hops fast characters had a much larger advantage. When Brawl came out people were excited that the characters seemed to be balanced better, but once people started practicing and finding little tricks with certain characters it became clear that in a match of players of equal skill the certain characters could win easily. They became the top tier characters. That is what I have gathered about tiers during my time playing the game, but I could be wrong on a couple details. Let me know if you think I am.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 7:34:57 GMT -5
Post by Natlaw on Feb 3, 2009 7:34:57 GMT -5
Doing a quick read at work and got a question about posting styles. Here is my problem with this post...SHE IS DEAD, why are you so aggressively stating again reason's she should be lynched? She was town, and was dead, yet you seem to keep going with bolstering why it is good, when clearly it was not! She was town!!! <snip> Would not a fellow town person be a little more upset? ? <snip> Care to explain why else there was no recorse for her, only voting one? but for me there was? ? Why did you 3 go after me so hard, yet not her? Are the excessive question and exclamation marks and the drama posting style common (on Facebook maybe)? At the moment I get a macey feel from it and that's not good (she was scum and got lynched Day one in Evil Dead for make a post like that. But perhaps that is because I play the game more analytical than emotional. The drama has a certain flair, but easy to confuse with the real deal. Yeah, peeker, it means you're a dirty old man. Seriously, it means you've cast all three votes and your vote will actually count. People in italics have not cast all three votes and their votes won't actually count. --FCOD I'll be a nitpick and point out that for the point totals italic/not italic is reversed. I would place the partial vote points in the italic brackets, but changing that now would probably confuse everyone .
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 7:44:54 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Feb 3, 2009 7:44:54 GMT -5
So let me get this straight even despite the fact that WE KNOW she is a tracker and can track the scum mason to the scum hide out....that deos not mean she could have found out ANDY? ? Dude she told us she could, it is in the main thread, And her death proved it, so your still not wanting to believe it, is mind boggling. It say's she is a tracker, she track's the masons to find which one is scum. So why still argue over what is fact. What? Did you even read her claim? There was nothing that implied she could track anyone to the scum hideout. She merely sees who someone targets and who targets them. That's it. There is no mention of following a fellow mason to the SCUM board, so I have no clue where you got that one from. The relevant power as posted by her is thus: That's it. Where did you get the idea it was otherwise? No, it's not what I said. Do you actually read what people write for comprehension of what they actually say, or just to confirm your own thoughts? My (and other people's) point is that you found Zeriel suspicious because he only voted for one mason. And you cite that as a reason for why you voted for him. Then you turn around and vote for only one mason yourself. That's what I found suspicious. If you notice, those who are giving you the most heat for voting one mason are those who themselves voted one mason. The difference was, our reasonings had nothing to do with that mason voting for only one mason. It's because we feel the information distribution is better served this way. We aren't on your case because you did what we did (unlike you being on Zeriel's case for doing what you did.) We're on your case because you attack him for a reason, and then do the exact same thing yourself. He voted only mitey, and you voted him for that. It may not have been your sole reason, but it was a reason. So we're asking you why you think Mitey was clearly not scum. Because it's the only way you voting for one mason and condemning another player for doing the exact same thing would even remotely approach some consistency in rationale. You would have to know that the mason he voted for wasn't scum and he should look elsewhere. Otherwise, your reasoning is completely bogus. So either you had some reason to believe mitey was not scum that the rest of us weren't aware of, or you were hypocritical in one of your voting reasons. Both smack of scum motivations, and you haven't given us any pro-town reason why you did what you did. The fact that you can't see this is why you have attracted votes, even though this has been explained to you by multiple people multiple ways, just makes our case against you stronger.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 7:55:32 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Feb 3, 2009 7:55:32 GMT -5
I'll be honest, I didn't notice anywhere the moderator had said one way or another, so when Mitey claimed tracker, I assumed that the scum would have to pick an individual killer. I might have expected the same at one point until SMB, where pedescribe was a blocker who couldn't stop a kill, thereby making him all but useless. Trackers/Watchers are still very useful in non-scum-kill-designated games. And since the original opening color implied otherwise due to the miswording, roxis and I were both under the impression that it was not designated. The mods have since clarified (right at the end of yesterDay) that the scum do indeed designate a killer. So mitey's role could have outed a scum killer, but still unlikely if she's tracking a mason, because scum would be suicidal to designate the mason as the killer, particularly after Mitey said she was going to track one of the masons.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 8:02:16 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Feb 3, 2009 8:02:16 GMT -5
I know I got in trouble before for posting color related stuff, but basically 'Tiers don't exist' is the goal of the SSB franchise. *snip* Thanks. It was actually interesting. There's nothing wrong with posting color. I think the only trouble you'd get into for it is if you try to apply color to any specific mechanic of the Mafia game. In any themed game, the background color can provide certain clues to the setup, but it's tenous at best and strategizing on color alone is a lousy way to play. Any idea where the "tiers don exit" thing came from? Were there a lot of people typoing the phrase for a while and it caught on as a meme?
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 8:48:17 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 3, 2009 8:48:17 GMT -5
The moderator has already told us that the scum do not pick an individual killer, ergo the scum kill is not "trackable", ergo there's no way Mitey could have outed Ed. What?? No. I specifically said that the scum do designate an individual killer.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 9:02:08 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 3, 2009 9:02:08 GMT -5
I know I got in trouble before for posting color related stuff, but basically 'Tiers don't exist' is the goal of the SSB franchise. *snip* Thanks. It was actually interesting. There's nothing wrong with posting color. I think the only trouble you'd get into for it is if you try to apply color to any specific mechanic of the Mafia game. In any themed game, the background color can provide certain clues to the setup, but it's tenous at best and strategizing on color alone is a lousy way to play. Any idea where the "tiers don exit" thing came from? Were there a lot of people typoing the phrase for a while and it caught on as a meme? Well, after certain Melee players started to go professional due to the number of valid tournaments, people were noticing that certain characters were used more than any others. And so other industrious individuals decided to compile a list of tiers, which illustrated the relative powers of each character. Only, other people found this incredibly objectionable, and this started a massive flame war which still hasn't died down in some places, with the people supporting tiers calling those that didn't idiot n00blets, and those that didn't calling the supporters lifeless boring power gamers who all lived in their mother's basements. Somewhere along the line, someone simply started a thread called TIRES DON EXIT, and the meme was born. Oh, and here's a list of tiers if you're curious.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 10:31:29 GMT -5
Post by Hal Briston on Feb 3, 2009 10:31:29 GMT -5
Voting all three Masons seemed to be the thing, yesterDay. Should we consider a 3rd-place Special Ed vote a potential scumtell? I'd be more apt to think scum would vote Ed second (and I say that as someone who voted him second...or, at least I think I did...I'd have to go back and check). More of a "hide in the middle" sort of move, ya know?
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 11:47:44 GMT -5
Post by Hal Briston on Feb 3, 2009 11:47:44 GMT -5
...and went back and checked I did...I voted him 3rd. Still, my theory stands.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 11:54:01 GMT -5
Post by KidVermicious on Feb 3, 2009 11:54:01 GMT -5
The moderator has already told us that the scum do not pick an individual killer, ergo the scum kill is not "trackable", ergo there's no way Mitey could have outed Ed. What?? No. I specifically said that the scum do designate an individual killer. Copy that, thanks.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 11:56:11 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Feb 3, 2009 11:56:11 GMT -5
So the people who voted Ed first, second, third or not at all are giving off scum vibes. Good to know.
It just goes to show you, any data can be manipulated if you change the assumptions.
Shaggy, I find myself forced to agree with Sinjin here. You seem to have a blind spot when it comes to Mitey. Personally, I couldn't imagine playing in the same Mafia game as my wife. There's no way we could keep our personal roles and information seperate from each other. More power to you if you can.
I think I'm going to start voting Ed Day 1 in every game. He's starting to become Rugger like in his always scumminess.
Am I the only person that notices that the Days are always amazingly quiet when we have a guaranteed scum, even though we always say we should discuss other people? Yet we never really seem to do so. Even Today, the non-Ed conversation is fairly minimal for a Day 2.
Zelda are you out there?
For the record Hoopy, I always assume the scum designate a killer unless we are specifically told otherwise by the mod. That's been the case in the majority of the games I've played in as far as I can remember. And no, I don't consider color being specifically told otherwise. Adding a tracker or watcher role just confirms it to my mind.
Oh and in case it isn't obvious to everyone, no one should really be reading or responding to Ed. He's scum, and anything he says should be ignored on that grounds. Outted scum are doing their best to sow confusion, and there's no reason to feed the troll so to speak.
Shaggy, the reason Mitey's was a magic bag and Zeriel's wasn't is mainly that she specifically asked for another Day whereas Zeriel didn't. Saying I have powers and I can use them to gather information, but it won't be until Tomorrow is a magic bag. Saying I have powers but I don't want to share what they are is not.
Oh and this specifcally
is not accurate. The only places I've talked to any of the players in these games is within the designated game areas for these games. I don't have a FB, or MSN, or any other chat programs for that matter. I post in the game threads, the sign up threads, the spoiler threads, and any offsite boards set up for the games and that's it. Sorry.
I won't be voting yet, since it seems that people want to hold off for now. But when I do, I think I'm going to have to go with Ed, Shaggy and Aubby. Ed is obvious. Shaggy for his lack of reasons for not voting or even really discussing Mitey Yesterday, and for his reaction to being called on it Today. Aubby for her constant waffling on her thoughts on who is scummy and why. A nice place for scum to hide out, since it's hard then to pin them down on something specific.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 11:56:42 GMT -5
Post by KidVermicious on Feb 3, 2009 11:56:42 GMT -5
Voting all three Masons seemed to be the thing, yesterDay. Should we consider a 3rd-place Special Ed vote a potential scumtell? I'd be more apt to think scum would vote Ed second (and I say that as someone who voted him second...or, at least I think I did...I'd have to go back and check). More of a "hide in the middle" sort of move, ya know? Thanks, Hal. Anybody else wanna weigh in on this?
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 12:29:17 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Feb 3, 2009 12:29:17 GMT -5
To be honest I have to say that this discussion on where scum would place ed in their vote yesterday is bordering on the ridiculous. The one thing I've noticed a lot of though is people saying some form of: The scummiest thing would be to vote ed in x position, and I even did that.
To be honest that's starting to ping me, as it seems like a way to back up your argument on a gut level (he must be on the up and up he's even self incriminating to say this) while smudging a group of people, and while including yourself in the group, placing yourself just slightly above since you said it.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 12:29:56 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Feb 3, 2009 12:29:56 GMT -5
also kidv I'm not skimming, stop trying to make me think I am with the misinterpreting the mods and stuff.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 12:30:52 GMT -5
Post by KidVermicious on Feb 3, 2009 12:30:52 GMT -5
also kidv I'm not skimming, stop trying to make me think I am with the misinterpreting the mods and stuff.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 12:32:30 GMT -5
Post by aubby on Feb 3, 2009 12:32:30 GMT -5
It may look like obfuscation to you, KidV, but I think it would be more suspicious if I said I was SURE he was scum. Of course it would. But leaving him off and voting the other two masons? There were two schools of thought among the populace yesterday. Either we voted all 3 masons, or we voted for the one we thought was the scummy. You were one of the few who voted for two masons and not the third. And you never really justified why. After all, you can't really expect us to think that the justifications you gave here: psychopathgame.proboards106.com/index.cgi?board=smashing&action=display&thread=729&page=13#39723...are remotely solid. I voted for him later. Yes, as number 2 behind Zeriel, but that was my thought at the moment. And I changed my vote without him coming back in to explain because it seemed to me Ed was sure the scum could talk during the day. Others didn't seem clear on it at that point. Based on that, yeah, I probably should have moved him to #1 but I wasn't understanding why Zeriel outed without the agreement of the other masons. Hindsight is a great thing eh?
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 12:42:04 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Feb 3, 2009 12:42:04 GMT -5
And no, I don't consider color being specifically told otherwise. So how do you distinguish which aspects in mod descriptions of the set up should be considered relevant and which ones shouldn't? I interpreted the phrase " a joint kill by night, scum kill during the night" as meaning a selected common kill by scum like SMB or Doperville had.
|
|
|
Day 2
Feb 3, 2009 12:45:18 GMT -5
Post by aubby on Feb 3, 2009 12:45:18 GMT -5
I'll share my thoughts/theories, but i can't really back them up.
As much as Sinjin seems to be on attack, it seems pretty strong for a SCUM. In my limited experience SCUM try not to come on too strong in the beginning. I don't know her playing style, so maybe she's just an in your face sorta person.
I was having a hard time on reading Ed (obviously now he is scum) because he can post things that distract so well when he is laying down a line of BS. I couldn't tell if that's what he was doing, but after reading the Mason thread it seemed more scummy to me.
Obviously the other scum voted Ed in some way. But in what order? Who knows? They could have placed him at #1 knowing his points were not going up the way Mitey's and Zeriel's were.
|
|