Return to “Mafia Championship Scrimmage [END]”
Golden wrote:After MM's case, sloonei.
After sloonei jumped off the Frog vote, sloonei.
It's not that hard to follow.
No, you just wish that was the case because then you can give a justified reason to vote me. :PGolden wrote:No, no, I gave simple reads.a2thezebra wrote:Right, because a simple read is so much to ask that if given, it might as well be public knowledge as encyclopedic fact.Golden wrote:Oh, ok.a2thezebra wrote:I had a feeling you would use this tactic at some point. Does your read look a little bit fabricated folks? Claim it as "nuance" and make known your disapproval of such outdated terms as "good" or "bad" in regards to reading other players.Golden wrote: Trying to remove all nuance and force me to term my thoughts on sloonei across the game as either 'good' or 'bad' and not shades of grey on a sliding scale don't sit well with me.
I'll expect all of your rainbow lists to be 'confirmed town' or 'confirmed scum' from now on.
You just don't like that 'slight scum' and 'strong scum' are different.
Right, because a simple read is so much to ask that if given, it might as well be public knowledge as encyclopedic fact.Golden wrote:Oh, ok.a2thezebra wrote:I had a feeling you would use this tactic at some point. Does your read look a little bit fabricated folks? Claim it as "nuance" and make known your disapproval of such outdated terms as "good" or "bad" in regards to reading other players.Golden wrote: Trying to remove all nuance and force me to term my thoughts on sloonei across the game as either 'good' or 'bad' and not shades of grey on a sliding scale don't sit well with me.
I'll expect all of your rainbow lists to be 'confirmed town' or 'confirmed scum' from now on.
I had a feeling you would use this tactic at some point. Does your read look a little bit fabricated folks? Claim it as "nuance" and make known your disapproval of such outdated terms as "good" or "bad" in regards to reading other players.Golden wrote: Trying to remove all nuance and force me to term my thoughts on sloonei across the game as either 'good' or 'bad' and not shades of grey on a sliding scale don't sit well with me.
Ewwww no.Dyslexicon wrote:Show me where I misrepresented you, and I will show you where you misrepresented me. It will be fun.a2thezebra wrote:There's only so much misrepresentation I can take before it starts to feel like a deliberate effort to make me an even easier mislynch than I already am.
Um...that's totally a concession. You gave him credit and everything. What???Golden wrote:No, it really isn't.a2thezebra wrote:Haha, and this is a good example of what I was talking about when I said that Golden seems to be trying to make his reads look natural and failing.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Bullshit.Golden wrote:I wasn't wrong at all, MM. Your case on sloonei was shit, because you hadn't demonstrated any context. I don't have to do your research for you.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Golden: I didn't like his attitude wert me yesterday. He, like you, was very hesitant to vote for Sloonei, despite acknowledging that Sloonei was a decent candidate for Day 1. Also, responses like this just give me the shivers. An "Oh, of course I meant to do that" instead of an "Aye, good call there, I was wrong".
If the case was shit, why did you concede that Sloonei was on your list of "players to lynch" as a result of the case?
Marmot is being deliberately misleading. His first case was shit. I prompted him to do extra work. The extra work was both unexpected to me, and fundamentally did shift my perspective on how good his case was. It was only AFTER he added to the case that I put sloonei on my list of 'players to lynch' (hardly a concession).
I was genuinely surprised to discover Sloonei had Frog as a top baddie read before that. It was persuasive. It still is, as you'll find out soon when I fully talk about my hunch. But, I'm doing my catch up first.
Perhaps you're not always a hurricane of self-assurance as town, but that doesn't explain why your reads, particularly the development of your reads, feel so unnatural. You don't seem like you don't want to stand out, you don't seem like you're providing cover for town power roles, you do seem like you simply want to blend in and nothing more.Golden wrote:Yeah - you've been in games where I've addressed this so you will probably see the wisdom in what I'm about to say - Star Wars, for instance, where bcornett was trying to paint me as bad?a2thezebra wrote:I didn't say anything but throughout yesterday I felt like Golden lacked the "hurricane of self-assurance" factor that he's known for as town.
The hurricane of self-assurance is a guaranteed town setting for me. You won't see it when I'm bad.
But the inverse is not true. I have many different ways of playing as town. It's just that the 'hurricane of self-assurance' is an easy read. It's a style I developed and became known for on RM when I got a few roles that were hard to NK in short order. I didn't play that way in champs either. I did in Dune... why? Because my role allowed me to figure out other players roles. I did in Turf Wars... why? Because I didn't really have time to play and wanted to have a big impact and be nked early.
I'm trying to simulate how I'll play in the champs game here, as closely as I can. I'm thinking about what I'll do stylistically etc. I certainly doubt I'll be playing hurricane of self assurance in that game. Especialyl because I want to set up a meta I can maintain in the finals if, say, I'm town in heats and mafia in finals. If I'm a town power role, I won't want to stand out. If I'm a vanilla town, I'll want to provide cover for town power roles. If I'm mafia, well, I'll want to blend in.
I don't buy it. Maybe I'm biased since my catch-up for the end of day made it all the more clear that Frog was town to me, but I don't see how anyone could honestly perceive Frog's actions at EoD to be mafia-motivated. It's unlike you to misread others due to "cultural" reasons.Golden wrote:Yes. It felt like his whole thing (even the drunk posting) was a tactical grab for town cred, to me. That's how I was reading him by end of day. And I feel like I may actually have had that right, that it was a tactical cred grab, and thats why I think maybe my misread was cultural.a2thezebra wrote:And you suspected him for that turn around?Golden wrote:Whenever I made the post that I was tinfoiling him as bad. It's in my iso.Marco wrote:I'd also like to know from Golden when he exactly started scum-reading Frog. He had Frog on his town list for majority of the phase, IIRC, and I remember being confused about his EOD switch to Frog.
I'll be completely honest, though, and say I was probably influenced by his tone more than his content. I felt like he was trying to be a town leader while spouting echanics that could be easily defeated. Culture Clash may account for the aspects I didnt' like about him.
I do feel his style changed over the day. Early on it felt like he was explaining what he was up to clearly, so I could understand what he was putting in the thread. But, the second half of the day was more like 'x is true, you all suck and are not town unless you take my word for it', which was a complete turn around.
See Golden, I'm sorry if I'm wrong but this whole post just seems so fake. You only vocalized the distinction between the initial case and the "extra work" after MM called you out on contradicting yourself. If he hadn't have called you out, would that distinction ever have been made?Golden wrote:Because you then added to the case, after I prompted you to do so. You were quite content to make a flawed case to begin with.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Bullshit.Golden wrote:I wasn't wrong at all, MM. Your case on sloonei was shit, because you hadn't demonstrated any context. I don't have to do your research for you.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Golden: I didn't like his attitude wert me yesterday. He, like you, was very hesitant to vote for Sloonei, despite acknowledging that Sloonei was a decent candidate for Day 1. Also, responses like this just give me the shivers. An "Oh, of course I meant to do that
If the case was shit, why did you concede that Sloonei was on your list of "players to lynch" as a result of the case?
Having said that, then when you DID do the extra work, I was surprised to discover your case actually had merit. Doesn't change the fact that I do not agree that your initial case had merit. It was half-assed and flawed, and looked to me like a case that you were portraying just to get yourself off the bottom.
I don't know why you'd expect me to say "I was wrong" for forcing you to build a fuller case. I was quite satisfied with my work.
Oh you're not suspicious? Well never mind then, I could have sworn that you were.Metalmarsh89 wrote:What if I told you that I'm actually not a suspicious person at all?a2thezebra wrote:This is amusing, being tempted to join two of my suspicions to lynch my third suspicion.
Linki: This is turning into the greatest game ever.
I'm not sure how well I know MM, because the more I know him the less confident I become about reading him. With him it could go either way regarding his town slip. He may have even fake town-slipped despite being town, I don't know. My suspicion of you is because your suspicion of me seems (seemed?) disingenuous. There's only so much misrepresentation I can take before it starts to feel like a deliberate effort to make me an even easier mislynch than I already am.Dyslexicon wrote:How well do you know MM? Care to comment on the conversation I had with him at EOD where he either town slipped or fake town slipped?a2thezebra wrote:This is amusing, being tempted to join two of my suspicions to lynch my third suspicion.
What is your suspicion on me based off of? That I wanted you dead D1? You think I was kitten you with my suspicion?
Thinking through scenarios? To me it feels more like Golden didn't want to civ read me too suddenly after voicing initial suspicion, and as a baddie his interest in making sure his reads don't seem unnatural is more of a priority than as a civ. The irony of this is that, if Golden is in fact a baddie, caring more about changing his reads of others is the greatest evidence that they are in fact fabricated reads, because I don't think civ Golden would be "thinking through scenarios" by suggesting that I'm a mafia goon that wants to take out MP tomorrow. That's too specific and at the same time too absurd of a scenario to consider and propose in-thread for a genuine read. Civ Golden, as I understand him, would either tunnel me more without feeling the need to bring up bizarre theories to justify his suspicion of me, or he would be swayed to town-read me more fluidly and less vaguely.Golden wrote:Lol. Nah, sigs right. It's a stupid idea. Oh well, I was just thinking through scenarios.a2thezebra wrote:Ooooh that's a clever idea. I should try it sometime.Golden wrote:Have you considered the possibility she is mafia goon and wants to take you out behind her tomorrow.MovingPictures07 wrote:I appreciate the confidence and that someone actually seems content in helping avoid a mislynch, but let's try and redirect this towards another individual. I'm town reading you enough to not want you lynched either.a2thezebra wrote:I'm town and I'd like to keep playing, but keeping MP alive takes the top priority right now.
VOTE A2THEZEBRA
This could be testing me given that my self-vote was directly linked to a confident civ read of MP, or (and this is what I think) it could be baddie Golden maneuvering his way to what he perceives as a believable change of opinion regarding my alignment.Golden wrote:I do feel god about zebras responses to me and I'd like to shift my vote but I won't if it leads to an mp lynch.
I also find this post somewhat hard to believe given that even at my most vocal I am known for not having a very wide focus (unless I'm just shit-flinging everywhere) both as civilian and mafia, but that might just be me.Golden wrote:Oh, no, I never thought you were playing specifically to a mafia meta. But, I do think that a lack of reads and connections (no matter how many posts you've got) is somewhat of a mafia meta on you, at least thats how I feel.a2thezebra wrote:just that I'm not automatically mafia for being quiet.
Sure there was a lot of time left in the day, but look at his bottom two. Me, who he ended up town-reading before the lynch, and DrWilgy, who he didn't talk about that much, at least relative to other players. Then you've got Frog, his eventual vote, at the top of his Mild Town list. Mild, sure, but I don't buy the reasoning he gave today for what convinced him that Frog was bad. Trying to seem like a town leader? That was pretty obvious, but why was it alignment-indicative? Why was the comment about night-killing (that Golden claims to have swayed him to an extent) alignment-indicative? I'm just not convinced that Golden's reads in this game are legitimate, but I'd like to see his response to these suspicions first before I make any move.Golden wrote:Rainbow time - decided to treat it like gth and have no null reads.
Medium Town
Marco
Sloonei
Zexy
Mild Town
Frog
MovingPictures07
Silverwolf
Dyslexicon
Long Con
sig
Mild Bad
ika
Inawordyes
Psittaciform
Soneji
Metalmarsh89
Moderate Bad
a2thezebra
DrWilgy
I love you too, but I'm not ready to vote Golden given that as we converse here and now he's not even aware that I suspect him yet. I want to see his response to my suspicion (in addition to MM's and I guess yours) first, and if it doesn't sway me then I'll join you on that vote.Dyslexicon wrote:Zebra, let's join forces on Golden, because I love you.
VOTE GOLDEN
Not off the top of my head, but I'll go digging for some.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Do you have any other examples of this? I wouldn't mind seeing them, because I'm getting a similar vibe from Golden.a2thezebra wrote:Haha, and this is a good example of what I was talking about when I said that Golden seems to be trying to make his reads look natural and failing.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Bullshit.Golden wrote:I wasn't wrong at all, MM. Your case on sloonei was shit, because you hadn't demonstrated any context. I don't have to do your research for you.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Golden: I didn't like his attitude wert me yesterday. He, like you, was very hesitant to vote for Sloonei, despite acknowledging that Sloonei was a decent candidate for Day 1. Also, responses like this just give me the shivers. An "Oh, of course I meant to do that
If the case was shit, why did you concede that Sloonei was on your list of "players to lynch" as a result of the case?
Linki: Negatron.
So are you confessing or are you saying that you were framed?ika wrote:If I was scum, yes that would be the case.a2thezebra wrote:So you did kill her.ika wrote:I'm on break but anyone who thinks I wouldn't kill silver n1 is being redoicolus.
mmmmmmmmmmmMetalmarsh89 wrote:Tell me he at least did it for the peanut butter cookies.a2thezebra wrote:So you did kill her.ika wrote:I'm on break but anyone who thinks I wouldn't kill silver n1 is being redoicolus.
So you did kill her.ika wrote:I'm on break but anyone who thinks I wouldn't kill silver n1 is being redoicolus.
Haha, and this is a good example of what I was talking about when I said that Golden seems to be trying to make his reads look natural and failing.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Bullshit.Golden wrote:I wasn't wrong at all, MM. Your case on sloonei was shit, because you hadn't demonstrated any context. I don't have to do your research for you.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Golden: I didn't like his attitude wert me yesterday. He, like you, was very hesitant to vote for Sloonei, despite acknowledging that Sloonei was a decent candidate for Day 1. Also, responses like this just give me the shivers. An "Oh, of course I meant to do that
If the case was shit, why did you concede that Sloonei was on your list of "players to lynch" as a result of the case?
And you suspected him for that turn around?Golden wrote:Whenever I made the post that I was tinfoiling him as bad. It's in my iso.Marco wrote:I'd also like to know from Golden when he exactly started scum-reading Frog. He had Frog on his town list for majority of the phase, IIRC, and I remember being confused about his EOD switch to Frog.
I'll be completely honest, though, and say I was probably influenced by his tone more than his content. I felt like he was trying to be a town leader while spouting echanics that could be easily defeated. Culture Clash may account for the aspects I didnt' like about him.
I do feel his style changed over the day. Early on it felt like he was explaining what he was up to clearly, so I could understand what he was putting in the thread. But, the second half of the day was more like 'x is true, you all suck and are not town unless you take my word for it', which was a complete turn around.
Hmmm....perhaps. As far as lurkers go, I don't think Sloonei is in the same league as some of the others.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Yes.a2thezebra wrote:I acknowledge that he falls into that category, I just don't think that that is reason to lynch him. I thought you didn't either? Didn't you have other reasons for suspecting him?Metalmarsh89 wrote:He falls into that category of lurkers/low-participants, even if he doesn't want to. I don't think anyone else has been ready to acknowledge that either.
But for the folks (like Golden) who are entertaining lynching a lurker, they should put Sloonei into that category.
Rude, lol.Dyslexicon wrote:would be a good lynch in any case imo, but mostly cause I believe she is scum.
That's a damn good question.Epignosis wrote:I read Inawordyes' 17 posts. Why does he have four votes?
I acknowledge that he falls into that category, I just don't think that that is reason to lynch him. I thought you didn't either? Didn't you have other reasons for suspecting him?Metalmarsh89 wrote:He falls into that category of lurkers/low-participants, even if he doesn't want to. I don't think anyone else has been ready to acknowledge that either.
I'm talking about when she is mafia (and I think she is here but that's beside the point). When she is mafia, and she goes after someone more active, that is a fabricated read.ika wrote:no? she made a case on MP, everyone's yelling the case is not true.a2thezebra wrote:You do realize that going after someone more active is still a fabricated read, right?ika wrote:i belive silver already answered that herself, if she was scum she wouldn't be going after lurkers, she would be going after someone more active. she would not touch and actually probably defend the lurkersGolden wrote:How does she give scum reads when she is scum if she doesn't fabricate them?ika wrote:explain to me how its a fabrication cus she doesnt fabirctae reads. she was scum readding him all day
if that doesnt suffice i can elaborate more, i dislike giving out silvers meta if i can not do so.
You do realize that going after someone more active is still a fabricated read, right?ika wrote:i belive silver already answered that herself, if she was scum she wouldn't be going after lurkers, she would be going after someone more active. she would not touch and actually probably defend the lurkersGolden wrote:How does she give scum reads when she is scum if she doesn't fabricate them?ika wrote:explain to me how its a fabrication cus she doesnt fabirctae reads. she was scum readding him all day
if that doesnt suffice i can elaborate more, i dislike giving out silvers meta if i can not do so.
Well you're wrong, so lol you and all indeed.Dyslexicon wrote:I'm not saying you are patting yourself on the back. I'm saying you're trying to come across as sacrificial town. This is how I read things. I'm explaining that. If I'm wrong, lol me and all, but this is my reading of what you are doing. And your reaction to me is not making me feel better.a2thezebra wrote:Okay that's it you're just making shit up. Playing it up too much? Not one time did I imply that I was "such a good town" for self-voting. Quite the opposite, actually. I self-voted because I found MP more valuable even as a potential baddie then my role as town. How is that patting myself on the back? In fact, how is it not the opposite? Then you just go on to paraphrase my actions and color them as if they are disingenuous while giving absolutely no reason to perceive them as disingenuous to begin with.
Of course I'm invested in my surviving. WHY WOULDN'T I BE?! I have said multiple times both when I initially self-voted and in my response to you, that the only reason I self-voted was because I felt that my mislynching was inevitable in the first place.
---
Is someone has extensive meta on Zebra that accounts for something like, yes this is definitely her town play, then please share.
Although I changed my mind about him recently, this is a good observation. Argh.Marco wrote:After some thought, I'm going with MetalMarsh. It feels like he has stopped engaging once the IAWY wagon overtook him.
Anyone who is ever a baddie has fabricated reads at some point. It's literally impossible to do as a baddie with a single mafia team unless you're going to bus all of your teammates, out yourself as a baddie, and correctly identify every civilian. This is what people talk about when they talk about your judgment of Silver being clouded.ika wrote:explain to me how its a fabrication cus she doesnt fabirctae reads. she was scum readding him all daya2thezebra wrote:I read her ISO. It didn't help wash away the inconsistency that I perceive her to have, it only made it more clear to me that her read of IAWY is a fabrication. I can't see what town motivation she would have for fabricating a read of someone who she currently has a vote for near end of day.ika wrote:shes towna2thezebra wrote:Since there are now no votes on MP and I have changed my mind about MM, I'm switching my vote to Silverwolf because her inconsistency regarding Inawordyes is more alarming to me than Long Con's Sloonei vote. As for the wagon on Inawordyes, I'm somewhat on the fence about him, but gun to my head, I would say he is town. I'm not confident enough in that read to vocally oppose the lynch but I am not going to vote for him unless it's to save someone who I more confidently read as civilian.
VOTE SILVERWOLF
did you read her iso? she said it was in there
No, I don't.Dyslexicon wrote:You still think that. You had 0 or 1 votes at you in this post, or what? Rawr. So much rawr. Do you have a read on sig?a2thezebra wrote:This isn't an unreasonable suspicion, but you still don't get that it wasn't really a sacrifice in my view since I figured that I would be mislynched anyway. I still think that to an extent, although there are a lot more people town-reading me now then there were before.
I read her ISO. It didn't help wash away the inconsistency that I perceive her to have, it only made it more clear to me that her read of IAWY is a fabrication. I can't see what town motivation she would have for fabricating a read of someone who she currently has a vote for near end of day.ika wrote:shes towna2thezebra wrote:Since there are now no votes on MP and I have changed my mind about MM, I'm switching my vote to Silverwolf because her inconsistency regarding Inawordyes is more alarming to me than Long Con's Sloonei vote. As for the wagon on Inawordyes, I'm somewhat on the fence about him, but gun to my head, I would say he is town. I'm not confident enough in that read to vocally oppose the lynch but I am not going to vote for him unless it's to save someone who I more confidently read as civilian.
VOTE SILVERWOLF
did you read her iso? she said it was in there
That works for me if it works for you.ika wrote:how about you pm us post game and we talk about it out of the game,i think that will help understand persepctives more without game biasa2thezebra wrote: I'm not intending to instigate anyone and, I'm sorry, but I don't feel responsible for any upset feelings when I am literally doing nothing more than playing the game. If I suspect someone for something, I'm going to voice that suspicion. If the suspicion by itself upsets someone, then I'm sorry, but I can't be blamed for that. You shouldn't be playing mafia if you cannot stand to be suspected. I like you two as mafia players but you both have a tendency to get emotional simply for being the target of suspicion, and it's just not healthy in this game.
Asking nicely is about as persuasive as your gambit theory. As in, not very persuasive. Whether you know me or you don't.Dyslexicon wrote:Like, can we please lynch Zebra? Please?
- Kisses
I don't know how many hours were left in the day and I didn't care because to me everyone's minds seemed already made up that both MP and myself were bad, and I figured I could at least save one of us by prolonging MP's life enough to convince others that he is in fact not a baddie. Why would I fabricate suspecting someone to avoid a self-vote when my self-vote was perfectly warranted from my perspective?Dyslexicon wrote:How many hours were left in the day? Why not spend time finding a scum read to make a case on instead of self voting? Looks like gambit scum play, not town play.a2thezebra wrote:Again I think this is just you either misunderstanding or misrepresenting what my self-vote meant in the first place. It's not heroic, it's not a breakdown, it was simply a statement that I would prefer to die sooner rather than later if it means saving MP. Of course I'd rather we lynch someone who is neither me nor MP, but at the time that wasn't looking likely. If you would make the former post as any alignment, how are you remotely justified in not liking it because I posted it when you have no idea how much of a troll I can be?
And I wasn't justifying it and I'm not going to. I was merely stating my reaction.
I voted for MM because I suspected MM for his Sloonei vote. I don't think I have yet to consider voting for IAWY apart from the scenario where I vote for him to save someone I am more confident about.Dyslexicon wrote:I got that from you. I'm talking specifically about you saying you would make up scum reads if you were scum:a2thezebra wrote:I'm not sure where you got that "unlike when I'm scum I will not make things up".I totally make shit up when I'm town, all the time. Where did I say or even imply otherwise? I also don't know where you got "I'm totes town being heroic." Granted, my self-vote was not a breakdown or anything, but I wouldn't call it heroic either. I figured that my mislynch was inevitable so I might as well get it over with and save MP in the process who I strongly believe is town. It's not that complicated and it's certainly not heroic. I also find it very hard to believe that you legitimately take issue with me having no scum reads simply because I'm constantly having disagreements with people. Are you seriously implying that I should read people as scummy just for disagreeing with them? For shame. I also find it laughable that you ask me to vote for another lurker when I've made it abundantly clear that I am against going for lurkers in general, not just because I was among them at the time of Frog's crusade.
Both sig and Golden have used the "you should know better" shtick before on me specifically, so I think it's fair. Sorry if it irks you though.
I wasn't saying that to imply that I never make anything up when I'm good, only that for this particular game I see no reason to lie about having reads that I don't have.a2thezebra wrote:I don't have them, and unlike when I'm bad I'm not going to fake having them just to please everyone into not suspecting me.
I gave you five civvie reads, that's all I have. You should know better because your reasons for suspecting me are based on things that you've seen me do before as town more than once.
It is whiteknighting MP. Knights, heros. That is my take on it. And not an unreasonable one at all.
At the time he was the leading lynch and I had a very strong town read of him. You're damn right it is whiteknighting him.
How was it inevitable so many ours before end of day with votes being so close. Like really?
I'm not referring to the day, I'm referring to the game. I still think my lynch is inevitable, even with more and more town-reading me. With this many newcomers such as yourself that are unaccustomed to my theatrics, I'm bound to get lynched at some point.
No, I'm not implying that. I'm finding it really hard to believe that you have no scum reads enough to vote someone else than yourself when your discussion with Frog and Golden i.e reads as if you are at least suspecting them a bit.
I did not suspect either Frog and Golden. I was initially pinged my Frog, but I needed time to meditate on him to conclude whether I saw him as baddie-motivated, and I concluded that he was not. Where in my discussion with either of them did you get the idea that I was suspecting them?
Then I'm very interested to hear why you voted MM and considered voting INAWORD. No.
I see a distinction, and I think we need to be less comfortable lynching both the former and the latter. At least less comfortable with it being the Day 1 Plan A rather than Plan Z.Golden wrote:@zebra - do you see a distinction between 'lurker' and 'not giving us enough content or connection to form any reads'.
I would say the latter is what we need to be more comfortable lynching.
I know what you meant, and I think the opposite is true. Yes, on this site.Golden wrote:I don't mean 'in this game on this day' but 'on this site'. We do let them slide too much.a2thezebra wrote:I cannot stress enough how much I disagree with this view.Golden wrote: We'd do better to do more lynching of lurkers here, I think.
It was, my point is that I wouldn't be comfortable saving MP if I felt that my mislynch was anything other than inevitable.Metalmarsh89 wrote:I thought it was to save MP?a2thezebra wrote:Okay that's it you're just making shit up. Playing it up too much? Not one time did I imply that I was "such a good town" for self-voting. Quite the opposite, actually. I self-voted because I found MP more valuable even as a potential baddie then my role as town. How is that patting myself on the back? In fact, how is it not the opposite? Then you just go on to paraphrase my actions and color them as if they are disingenuous while giving absolutely no reason to perceive them as disingenuous to begin with.Dyslexicon wrote:I guess it was my first instinct (and would probably generally be to such a play), but it's like she's playing it up too much. Too much emphasis that she is being sacrificial and don't want you lynched cause she is such a good town, and oh, how hard it is to find other people to suspect, who would ever do this as mafia, must be town right, or else she'd just bandwagon, and oh she is probably getting lynched (way too many hours before day ends to say that) - and what happens? Votes are off her like that. I see a lot of people not seeming interested in her lynch. Sig, among others (who I suspect).MovingPictures07 wrote:Wait, Dizzy, I'm confused. In your first catchup post you say your first instinct says you should buy it, but then mostly in your second catchup post you start scum reading her behavior. Can you walk me through this? You lost me.
It just doesn't read town play to me at all. I don't know why it seems to fly with people. Is this normal for her town meta or something? It's not the self vote in itself, it's how it's played off afterwards. She is clearly invested in her surviving.
Of course I'm invested in my surviving. WHY WOULDN'T I BE?! I have said multiple times both when I initially self-voted and in my response to you, that the only reason I self-voted was because I felt that my mislynching was inevitable in the first place.
I'm not intending to instigate anyone and, I'm sorry, but I don't feel responsible for any upset feelings when I am literally doing nothing more than playing the game. If I suspect someone for something, I'm going to voice that suspicion. If the suspicion by itself upsets someone, then I'm sorry, but I can't be blamed for that. You shouldn't be playing mafia if you cannot stand to be suspected. I like you two as mafia players but you both have a tendency to get emotional simply for being the target of suspicion, and it's just not healthy in this game.ika wrote:SIgh.......a2thezebra wrote:That's not an accurate impression of how much consideration that I've given you, because I do give a fuck what you think. That's why I find it worth pointing out that your read of IAWY seems extremely inconsistent, and that your response to me pointing that out only made it more clear.Silverwolf wrote: I'm gonna give you the same consideration you've been giving me all game and tell you I don't give a fuck what you think. I've given plenty of thought on this so laugh at me all you want.
I don't care and I'm ignoring you for the rest of the day.
here, let me give some adivce, instigating her about such things like that is only gonna upset her, you saw me get upset too in heist, we are similar in that sense.
i think the biggest issue we (and yes i use we cus its me too that im seeing) is that both sides of us (ie me and silver vs everyone else) is insinuating that the ohter is wrong. its a matter of interpretation to us. when people just dont openly say "well i disagree for XYZ" for me at least, that's literally saying "nope you're wrong"
and maybe it has been said sevral times like that but we are jsut annyoed that we feel like everyon eis just not actaly taking the POV into consideration and trying to follow up on it
