Final Fantasy IX Mafia | Game over! | Who won? :o

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

The entire case on RR is that he's not scumhunting. It doesn't need to be explained anymore than that.

Look like Blending.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Wut. Pretty sure I was one of the first to talk about RR in my #228. but okay.




AM is null leaning scum for now.

Seph is town I think, but I don't like his response to his opinion on Hilt. Didn't really give a definitive answer to the question iirc.

Panta as a confident town read.

@J Why do you find Panta scummy?



Why? I questioned Hilt, I found his answers good and so I stopped pushing him and looked elsewhere. I'm not going to keep arguing if I think I'm wrong.




Dad is the Kuz/Soup Hydra, but carry on.



Wut.

The only people who had responded to my questions at that point were Acrostic and Seph.

I thought Seph was lacking in content (as I say in my #105), and then proceed to question him on his stances on two players.

His response to my initial question was contentless, so I asked a different question to get content from him. Is that so difficult to understand?



They weren't subtle. I straight up say that they're scummy and go. Do I need to write out my suspicions in a 10 line paragraph for you to notice it? Do I need to write them in big bold red text?

Why is it unacceptable to explain scumreads in one line if they're explainable in one line?



They haven't justified anything.

Yes, they've been active, yes they've provided reads. THEY HAVENT JUSTIFIED THOSE READS. Ughhhh.

You're not even disagreeing with me here, what is thisssss.



BECAUSE THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE RR VOTE IS THAT HE'S NOT DOING ANYTHING.

THERE'S NOTHING TO ADD.


Look, LST. Your case on me is essentially that I'm not explaining every read I have or change with paragraphs of text. Why should I if it's explainable in 1?

But no matter, how about I do it now?

Seph lacked any content, and his response to my initial question was wishy washy. However, town can be unsure of what they think of someone too. It's null, at least for one read. And so I question him on more reads to establish a read on him.

I felt Hilt was deliberately attempting to intimidate me and had an unjustified vote on Panta, but on questioning I found that the abrasiveness was just Hilt's nature and the vote was fair enough.

@LST Do you disagree with me? Was I wrong to back down? Because you seem to agree with me here that Hilt is town. So why was I scummy to stop pushing Hilt and move on?

The entire case on RR is that he's not scumhunting. It doesn't need to be explained anymore than that.




I don't even get LST anymore. Like, he seems to literally agree with me on every read I have, but I'm somehow scummy because I didn't spoonfeed all the explanations.

This whole post actually looks like a lot of blending. His reads looks like they conform with others when it doesn't pan out at all. He's trying to defend small content, he's for the most part defending his limited content for his pushes and his votes.

This last line smells, no one is asking for a spoonfeed, people are asking for an understandable reason.

Unvote
Vote: Seikend

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Prodding JTB

---

Voted | Voter(s) | Votes/Lynch
Acrostic | JTB | 1 / 8
Dad | Sephiroth's Masamune, Acrostic | 2 / 8
Leopard Skin Taser | Panta | 1 / 8
Seikend | Aggressive Mediation, Leopard Skin Taser, RedRyu | 3 / 8
Red Ryu | J, Seikend, Dad, SangfroidWarrior | 4 / 8

---​

Not Voting: Tandora, Tom, Hilt;
Takes 8/14 to lynch

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Unvote.

Will read when I get the chance.

 

[Seikend]

@RR

What is blending?

Which of my reads conform with others? Is this scummy if I initially had the read and people agreed with me? Why?

Which of my actions do you not understand? You haven't asked me anything before regarding my actions.

If you were town you'd question me to try and understand my reasoning and go from there. All you're doing is sitting back and saying I'm scum.

 

[#HBC | J]

@Sang: There's a little contradiction in your big catch up post.

JTB: He voted for Acrostic just because of his newbieness. I guess this is where the training wheels come off. But, he also blamed it on the fact that he "explained an RVS that didn't need to be explained” when Acro’s vote wasn’t really an RVS to begin with. Not much else from him, really. So nonexistent… but some of his posts are kind of off. Null leaning scum.

Acrostic: He makes a mistake calling the mod-confirmed a mafia, and he gets attacked for it, but it seems just like a newbie mistake being as he's a newbie. His vote on Seph seems RVS to me. He's being overdefensive for reasons he doesn't need to be (97/98), and I don’t understand it. I kind of like his 107 though. His #190 just makes him seem like a major wagon-jumper. I don't like it. His long posts are weird and contain mostly fluff. And by “fluff” I mean the stuff you put in an essay to make it seem like you’re actually doing work. It's... hard to read sometimes. I don't understand his #349 against Dad though. It was based on time restraints and we all get busy sometime. It's not a legitimate reason to me. Digging? Maybe. Null leaning scum.

Here you say JTB is null-leaning scum for you but at the same time you bring up in your Acrostic post that is was a newbie mistake for him to call the mod-confirmed a mafia. Can you explain this?

Also can you tell me who your second scum-pick is out of your null-leaning scum picks?

 

[#HBC | J]

Another note, I highly dislike RR's vote on Seik because it merely looks like a hop on vote to the only other bandwagon that isn't him.

 

[SangfroidWarrior]

@Sang: There's a little contradiction in your big catch up post.

Here you say JTB is null-leaning scum for you but at the same time you bring up in your Acrostic post that is was a newbie mistake for him to call the mod-confirmed a mafia. Can you explain this?

Wow. Major fail on my part. I'm gonna need to write down somewhere that JTB is confirmed town. I didn't really skip over that part but it slipped my mind. Thanks. Sorry.

Also can you tell me who your second scum-pick is out of your null-leaning scum picks?

Probably Acrostic. This is the order from most town to most scummy of my null-scum reads: Seikend, Hilt, Acro.

 

[#HBC | J]

Okay thanks. So you believe the Seik wagon has substance to it? What do think of posts 361/362?

 

[SangfroidWarrior]

So, let me correct that.

JTB: Town.

@J. I'm not sure. I agree that, with those posts, Seikend seemed to be putting out more information than his thoughts on things. But, it just seems like defensiveness, maybe a bit too much. It confuses my reads but it doesn't take away from my feeling that they are acting scummy.

 

[#HBC | J]

Do you believe RR vs. Seik could be SvS or TvS? (scum versus scum or town versus scum )

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

@Tom: What are your reads for today and who do you want lynched?

@RR: RR an explanation to why you decided to transition from me to Seikend would be nice. When I asked you to come at me, I wanted you to come at me so I could see you scumhunting and being pro-town before we decided to lynch. Bleck.

@Sangfroid:

Spoiler

He's being overdefensive for reasons he doesn't need to be (97/98), and I don’t understand it.

Being agitated =/= being over defensive.

His #190 just makes him seem like a major wagon-jumper.

There was no wagon to jump-on. Therefore I cannot be a wagon-jumper. Was I trying to get votes on LST? Yes. And it was because there was little to no content from that slot.

I don't like it. His long posts are weird and contain mostly fluff. And by “fluff” I mean the stuff you put in an essay to make it seem like you’re actually doing work. It's... hard to read sometimes.

He writes too much. Y/N?

I don't understand his #349 against Dad though. It was based on time restraints and we all get busy sometime. It's not a legitimate reason to me. Digging? Maybe. Null leaning scum.

Are you serious? Dad lied. No one commented on it. J gave it a complete pass. If someone lies then town should be curious about the intent. It's not based on time restraints. It's based on why Dad would lie in the first place when it was something as trivial as a hydra disagreement. It was not based on time restraints. Re-read and reassess.

 

[#HBC | J]

Acro, can you point out exactly where Dad lied because I still don't get what you are talking about. Sang asked this but now I'm curious too.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

J|Sangfroid it's in the second part of my #348. Dad said that he unvoted LST because there was not going to be a wagon on it. However later on he states that it is because of a disagreement from within the hydra. In other words he lied about the reason why they decided to unvote. This wouldn't be such a big deal to me, if Soupa I assume hadn't been condescending and trying to argue out his lie with J.

 

[#HBC | J]

Whoa whoa whoa. What? That's not what happened at all. He had LST as a scum-read but then he unvoted due to the fact of no one jumping on but in his opinion, still held him as a scum-read. I asked him later when he wouldn't put his vote on the LST wagon what changed and he said that he had talked to the other half and that the read had changed for their hydra.

You are seriously misconstruing the events to try and make Daddy look like he scum here and I don't like it one bit.

FoS: Acrostic

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Ah I thought that post was with regards to why they decided to unvote LST. And if that was the case, why they hadn't admitted to it sooner.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Dad tell me if this is the correct order of events:

Dad - Votes LST because Soupa feels Ignatius vote is unwarranted
Dad - Unvotes LST because there is no wagon
Acrostic - Votes for LST
Dad - Disagreement from within the hydra regarding LST vote
Dad - Kooz decides to vote for RR

 

[Dad]

Dad - Votes LST because Soupa feels Ignatius vote is unwarranted
Dad - Unvotes LST because there is no wagon and does not agree with the counter-acting one
Dad - Talks to koozy and had a hydra disagreement regarding LST vote
Dad - Talks to koozy more about latest events, i tell koozy i feel RR is null and Kooz says "Nope scum" we talk about it and come to an agreement.
Dad - Dad decides to vote for RR.

 

[Dad]

Whoa whoa whoa. What? That's not what happened at all. He had LST as a scum-read but then he unvoted due to the fact of no one jumping on but in his opinion, still held him as a scum-read. I asked him later when he wouldn't put his vote on the LST wagon what changed and he said that he had talked to the other half and that the read had changed for their hydra.

Basically.

guess i'm here, i'll do some things.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Dad - Votes LST because Soupa feels Ignatius vote is unwarranted
Dad - Unvotes LST because there is no wagon and does not agree with the counter-acting one
Dad - Talks to koozy and had a hydra disagreement regarding LST vote
Dad - Talks to koozy more about latest events, i tell koozy i feel RR is null and Kooz says "Nope scum" we talk about it and come to an agreement.
Dad - Dad decides to vote for RR.

Alright thanks. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Herp. Putting RR at L-2. Reason is on #372.

Unvote, Vote: Red Ryu

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Ebwop: L-3.

 

[#HBC | J]

He's at L-3 and how is that reasoning?

...the more you post, the more I am starting to dislike you. >_>

 

[Dad]

Am starting to agree with you J, me and kooz haven't been that up to date with this game, we need another session now that the ball is rolling, but like i said, i'm here, i'll do some things.

I personally don't agree with the seikend wagon, as i'm reading the case on him i feel that people are merely attacking him for the things he doesn't do, the only person who actually seemed to have somewhat of a legitimate vote was AM, everyone else have been a flock of sheep leading to a cliff.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

He's at L-3 and how is that reasoning?

...the more you post, the more I am starting to dislike you. >_>

That seems to be the general consensus on me this game. I didn't have a strong scum read aside from Dad when I did a re-read. I don't feel fantastic about RR either. But I think an RR lynch today is better than having a possible NL. I also think that pushing the lynch early is a better choice than scrambling at the last minute in case something happens. In other words, I don't feel strongly about RR being scum, but at the same time I don't feel like he's bled town with recent material or persuaded me on why I shouldn't vote him. All I see is him deciding to center his vote from me to Seikend.

 

[#HBC | J]

That post could have be shortened to, "I was wrong on my Dadscum read, I don't feel RR is scum but it's seeming like either him or a NL so I voted him." Yet if that was the case, you wouldn't have said, "Reasoning is in 372." like you actually had a scum-read on him.

Clarify this Acro, is RR a scum-read of yours or not? Also your first line is just pure AtE in your last post.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

The scum read on Dad was for reasons aforementioned.

 

[Dad]

J, opinion on Sang?

 

[Dad]

Seikend Aggressive Mediation, Leopard Skin Taser, RedRyu

What is even worse about this wagon is the fact RR is joining a counter-acting wagon with little reason, and this is first legitimate vote from here from what i've seen, the rest is just wading through stupid questions and defending his sorry ***.

un-sure about the LST vote, gonna need to read the case.

 

[#HBC | J]

Null atm. I like her intro post but there's something in it that's a bit...off. I need to re-read it later.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

That post could have be shortened to, "I was wrong on my Dadscum read, I don't feel RR is scum but it's seeming like either him or a NL so I voted him." Yet if that was the case, you wouldn't have said, "Reasoning is in 372." like you actually had a scum-read on him. Clarify this Acro, is RR a scum-read of yours or not? Also your first line is just pure AtE in your last post.

I'm null-scum on RR. I don't know why he decided to get off of me.

 

[Dad]

Null atm. I like her intro post but there's something in it that's a bit...off. I need to re-read it later.

Glad you agree.

 

[Dad]

This is why I dislike Seikend.

He states, maybe and then proceeds to vote. Doesn't make sense to me. Then he posts a lot of I agree with you while having little to provide for himself.

**** reasoning.jpg

 

[JTB]

I'm actually reading now.

J, is there anything I should pay close attention to? I know it's only 10 pages, but I have a bad tendency to miss things.

 

[#HBC | J]

I'm actually reading now.

J, is there anything I should pay close attention to? I know it's only 10 pages, but I have a bad tendency to miss things.

Pay attention to Acro.
The budding Seik/RR wagons.
Sang's intro post.
AM's weird intro posts.

That's all I can recall as prevelant atm. I would say look into each players individual posts to see what reads you get based off of those but you should be fine otherwise.

Your opinion on where you would like to vote would be great to know as well.

 

[DtJ Hilt]

Alright, time to catch up.

 

[SangfroidWarrior]

Being agitated =/= being over defensive.

Fair enough. I'll keep that in mind. Didn't seem agitated to me but I'll go back and re-read it.

There was no wagon to jump-on. Therefore I cannot be a wagon-jumper. Was I trying to get votes on LST? Yes. And it was because there was little to no content from that slot.

It just seemed like you saw somebody else was suspicious of LST and wanted everyone else to join you on that trip.

He writes too much. Y/N?

Meh. It just gave me a headache while I was trying to catch up last night. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are as... vocal as I am about needed to explain something extensively. I will also give you the benefit of the doubt that being defensive doesn't always mean you are scummy.

Re-read and reassess.

I will definitley do that. In fact, I'm trying it again right now.

 

[SangfroidWarrior]

Do you believe RR vs. Seik could be SvS or TvS? (scum versus scum or town versus scum )

Thanks for explaining that

SvS.

 

[SangfroidWarrior]

I did another re-read but, this time, I looked for things that not only struck me as odd but never really got explained. I want to ask people some questions, if that's alright. Even if it's not, I'm going to anyways.

@Everyone. What is up with the policy lynching?

I wanted to ask Ingnatius about how many times he would post because he gave forewarning that he was not going to post often and I wanted to know how I could prioritize questioning him in the future.

I hope you feel free to ask me as many questions as you want, however often you want.

Leopard, who posted 103? Could you guys label your posts while in the hydra?

Sorry to break it to you, but most hydra's aren't gonna tell you who's actually posting.

I trust you all to be able to sense sarcasm and irritability whenever it's present.

Eh. I'm horrible at that, so expect me to mistake your real pushes for jokes. Apologies in advance.

@Acro. At #11, why are you still holding onto the thought that JTB might still be scum. Do you still have that feeling? You say "I suppose this might still file under a possible scum allighned role..." I'm not sure I understand. Then, at #14, you vote Seph. Is that just RVS? I can understand your #29 that you are flustered and annoyed, but you're arguing semantics on JTB's confirmation of town. WRT #47, how can questions be taken as being defensive? Just a hint, don't dig too hard for reads. It messes you up.

@Seikend. With your #31 in mind, could you go back to before that and see if you get anything now that it is later in the game? Why is "Acrostic Town" blacked out on #105? You never really did explain why you disliked Hilt's vote on Panta. Why? If I missed it, please, point it out to me. Why do most of your posts contain questions and nothing really else? Reasons for voting RR in #250?

@RR. #74, what do you think of Seikend lurking early on? I don't like how you keep pushing that Acro isn't posting content at #119 when he had by that point. Not including inactives, who are your scum picks? I don't like your #260 because you defend hunting inactives but say nothing really else; instead, you attack Acro. Also, reasons for #291?

@LST. WRT #83, if you feel that I am faking content like you feel with my predecessor, please point it out to me and I will work on it.

@Hilt. I will try to keep your #81 in mind. WIFOM in #242. Would you mind explaining what you were trying to say? Also, while re-reading, I found I liked your string of posts.

@Panta. I don't like the end of #110. Presenting a good case doesn't always mean that person is correct. That just means you are easily persuaded and will therefore become a target for the town to buddy. In your #227, where do you find that LST has wagoned?

@Dad. In #138, why vote for LST? You kind of write him off as kind of being null and then you up and vote for him. You say you explained but I don't see a solid explanation. Reasons for voting RR in #256?

@J. Explain your #152 vote on Dad and everything after that WRT Dad. Are you assuming that people that have reads matching yours are automatically town? Dislike.

@AM. I would have questions for you but nothing has really shown of consequence that I need to ask about. Sorry to disappoint you

I think that's it for now. Will address everything else as it pops up. Also, I'm moving Acro to null. Although I don't like his initial defensiveness, he has gotten better. I still don't trust him, but he's null atm. Also, I'm moving Hilt to null leaning town because he has been working harder and my initial read of him was slightly off due to him needing people to ask him questions to start working. I'm not excusing him because of it, but he seems a lot more town lately. That leaves RR as my scum read and Seikend as my null leaning scum.

 

[SangfroidWarrior]

...I need to stop using emoticons...

 

[#HBC | J]

@Everyone. What is up with the policy lynching?

Policy lynching is going with lynching someone who is just lynched because it's good to do so. I.E. Lynching someone who is notoriously inactive and never really adds much regardless of alignment.

Thanks for explaining that

SvS.

Ballsy claim. Can you go into detail where you feel they are scum-mates distancing from one another?