Official USMB Mafia Game #8: Gremlins, Goblins, and Ghouls! (Oh my!)

[House]

That just confused me.

That said all kinds of weird things about you.

That just confused me.

That's what I do.

On an unrelated note, why do you town read me over a behavior that is easily emulated as scum?

I'm weird. Sue me.

Because you are acting like you did in game 6 as town and like you acted in 1539 when you were town and Wake and I were scum.

Irritable, annoying, and in your face.

You know being you. No appeasy-buddy buddy stuff.

He acted that way (in your face/irritable) in the game he played scum, but acted a different way with you in your hood. I don't know if you saw it or not, or remember it- I am not calling him scum, but I think town reading someone so quickly can hurt us. Unless I misunderstood Aye's set-up, but I don't think I did- (anyone, correct me if I am wrong) -Scum get to kill us each night and so does the serial killer- we lose two of us each night. This set-up reminds me of the Palace Game and we are looking to figure out different teams. We are already behind the eight ball in this set up and scum have a leg up, so we need to be open to all possibilities- just my two cents.

Now there is a townie post.

That just confused me.

That said all kinds of weird things about you.

That just confused me.

That's what I do.

On an unrelated note, why do you town read me over a behavior that is easily emulated as scum?

I'm weird. Sue me.

Because you are acting like you did in game 6 as town and like you acted in 1539 when you were town and Wake and I were scum.

Irritable, annoying, and in your face.

You know being you. No appeasy-buddy buddy stuff.

He acted that way (in your face/irritable) in the game he played scum, but acted a different way with you in your hood. I don't know if you saw it or not, or remember it- I am not calling him scum, but I think town reading someone so quickly can hurt us. Unless I misunderstood Aye's set-up, but I don't think I did- (anyone, correct me if I am wrong) -Scum get to kill us each night and so does the serial killer- we lose two of us each night. This set-up reminds me of the Palace Game and we are looking to figure out different teams. We are already behind the eight ball in this set up and scum have a leg up, so we need to be open to all possibilities- just my two cents.

Now there is a townie post.

LOL-Don't read me as town too quickly he says. Here's a townie post from someone who has barely posted he says.

Good one House.

I said the post was townie, not the player.
Pay attention. ;-)

 

[Wolfsister77]

Everyone draws the scum card sooner or later.

 

[House]

Wolfsister77 I also scum hunt when I am town, which I have not been doing this game.

I don't know if you genuinely missed that or if you are sandbagging your read of me, but I expect more from you.

I'm surprised Cafe didn't catch that, as well.

 

[Wolfsister77]

Wolfsister77 I also scum hunt when I am town, which I have not been doing this game.

I don't know if you genuinely missed that or if you are sandbagging your read of me, but I expect more from you.

I'm surprised Cafe didn't catch that, as well.

How much scum hunting as anyone done yet? I have, Wake has, FA and Shaitra a little bit but really not many people have scum hunted yet. I would of noticed this sooner or later but right now, we are all just developing reads. Many haven't posted much at all yet.

Give it time. BTW, my townread on you isn't set in stone. However, I'm pretty sure of it. Think what you want of my performance. I told everyone in the sign up thread, due to RL issues, I wasn't going to be able to put the same time and energy into this game as others.

People expect so much out of me. I either need to fight like hell, be rah rah rah go town, or I'm a disappointment to people. It's a little discouraging because with the bar set that high, there's no place for me to go but down.

 

[House]

Hard to get reads without scum hunting.

I disagree with your pessimism. Much is expected of you because you are seen doing it. It's not out of left field.

You are a good player, I'm just trying to discern your mindset.

 

[House]

Also, the fact you are a good player is what raises eyebrows when you aren't seen playing at 100%.

You bring it on yourself! ;-)

I will try to keep your quasi-V/LA In mind.

 

[House]

Not liking Wolfie's picking on House. Will keep my eyes on you to see if this is your Scum-game. HRM.

I wouldn't recommend a No-Lynch, and I think House should understand the gravity of that movement. By not lynching someone we get denied information we need.

Awaiting answers from Arden. Watching Cafe and Avatar b/c of their votes. Hm...

House is a big boy who is more than capable of taking care of himself. The sooner we get out of RVS, the better. And if you don't like NL, like I don't, you should understand why I voted for him.

I don't think he has the wherewithal to see through a No-Lynch.

What's important is whether or not his push for a NL makes him Scum.

It doesn't, and isn't indicative of his alignment. Since voting for a No-Lynch isn't synonymous with being Scum, I don't really understand why you voted for him. If you would, I'd appreciate some sort of explanation on why he should be voted for that.

Disagree. NL denies info. to town. At the least it's anti-town, at the most it's scummy. Why do you keep defending House anyway Wake?

Non.

No-Lynching is a suitable tactic in very certain situations. The act of doing so, even in the early-game, isn't necessarily Scummy. It may be, WOlfie, that House is a Townie who still has a bit of inexperience. I mean, he's only been playing a few months know. It's been six years for me and I'm still learning subtleties as I go about my business.

In theory yes NL during the early game does deny Town information and isn't recommended for optimal play. The question is whether or not House deserves to be lynched over it and, to that, I must say no. Though if you wish to continue with it I'll abide it, but still question you here and there as you pursue that angle. Personally I think a more pressing matter is Arden's bit about her Role PM although, since we're still in RVS, anything silly goes.

As for me continuously defending House that indicates that there's been more than one occasion that I've done such. In fact regarding me questioning you for voting House for his NL attempt, I don't think that even qualifies as defending him, because in truth I'm more or less wondering over your intent here.

Do you think House has the wherewithal to push through a NL today? I don't.

Anti-Town =/= Scum, so I reason it's not always valid to try and lynch someone for Anti-Town behavior, whether bourne of inexperience or not.

A NL on D1 is bad play and hurts town. There is no town motivation for doing so. So I'm happy with my vote Wake.

You underestimate House at your own peril.

Arden's comment means nothing to me cuz it was in RVS stage and I already gave it the appropriate response. If she pushes it further, she will be lying and then I'll change my vote but for now, there's no reason to vote for her for a silly RVS vote.

My vote was also done during RVS. Why did you attribute my vote more gravity that Arden's, when hers was predicated on a lie and mine was an obvious non-starter?

 

[House]

You underestimate House at your own peril.

This comment suggests to me that scum!Wolfie is subconsciously acting to eliminate a that while voicing her vote as being motivated from a townie mindset.

Vote: Wolfie

 

[House]

That = threat

 

[House]

Voicing = couching

Damn.

 

[Wolfsister77]

House is a big boy who is more than capable of taking care of himself. The sooner we get out of RVS, the better. And if you don't like NL, like I don't, you should understand why I voted for him.

I don't think he has the wherewithal to see through a No-Lynch.

What's important is whether or not his push for a NL makes him Scum.

It doesn't, and isn't indicative of his alignment. Since voting for a No-Lynch isn't synonymous with being Scum, I don't really understand why you voted for him. If you would, I'd appreciate some sort of explanation on why he should be voted for that.

Disagree. NL denies info. to town. At the least it's anti-town, at the most it's scummy. Why do you keep defending House anyway Wake?

Non.

No-Lynching is a suitable tactic in very certain situations. The act of doing so, even in the early-game, isn't necessarily Scummy. It may be, WOlfie, that House is a Townie who still has a bit of inexperience. I mean, he's only been playing a few months know. It's been six years for me and I'm still learning subtleties as I go about my business.

In theory yes NL during the early game does deny Town information and isn't recommended for optimal play. The question is whether or not House deserves to be lynched over it and, to that, I must say no. Though if you wish to continue with it I'll abide it, but still question you here and there as you pursue that angle. Personally I think a more pressing matter is Arden's bit about her Role PM although, since we're still in RVS, anything silly goes.

As for me continuously defending House that indicates that there's been more than one occasion that I've done such. In fact regarding me questioning you for voting House for his NL attempt, I don't think that even qualifies as defending him, because in truth I'm more or less wondering over your intent here.

Do you think House has the wherewithal to push through a NL today? I don't.

Anti-Town =/= Scum, so I reason it's not always valid to try and lynch someone for Anti-Town behavior, whether bourne of inexperience or not.

A NL on D1 is bad play and hurts town. There is no town motivation for doing so. So I'm happy with my vote Wake.

You underestimate House at your own peril.

Arden's comment means nothing to me cuz it was in RVS stage and I already gave it the appropriate response. If she pushes it further, she will be lying and then I'll change my vote but for now, there's no reason to vote for her for a silly RVS vote.

My vote was also done during RVS. Why did you attribute my vote more gravity that Arden's, when hers was predicated on a lie and mine was an obvious non-starter?

Arden's was a silly RVS vote that means nothing. Your vote advocates a policy that can hurt town. Plus it gets us out of RVS by making a serious vote for a serious reason.

 

[House]

A NL on D1 is bad play and hurts town. There is no town motivation for doing so. So I'm happy with my vote Wake.

You underestimate House at your own peril.

Arden's comment means nothing to me cuz it was in RVS stage and I already gave it the appropriate response. If she pushes it further, she will be lying and then I'll change my vote but for now, there's no reason to vote for her for a silly RVS vote.

House I do not underestimate. I believe he will be far more cautious since the last game we played where we got him.

Do you honestly think you should be moving to take House out so early? While there's not really any Town motivation for doing so I don't see much Scum-motivation for doing something so blatant like that.

If memory serves House's NL was in RVS, too. Hm. Now I'm getting paranoid here.

He already unvoted NL and declared RVS over. Both scum and town will do that so he could be either at this point. It's only one vote. I'm not putting him at L-1 or declaring intent to hammer or anything like that. Just letting him know he hasn't done anything too townie yet.

This supports my theory.

Happy with my vote thus far.

 

[Wolfsister77]

You are so full of BS it's laughable House. Get a real reason to vote me and then we'll talk. Otherwise, take your fabricated scumread and shove it where the sun don't shine.

Oh, and have a beautiful day.

 

[Wolfsister77]

You got any reads on anyone else House or are you just going to come in here, make up some pathetic excuse to vote me that isn't even worthy of the worst mafia player, and then leave?

I'm disappointed in you now. You've moved from town to null.

Still fine with my vote on Wake.

That is all until more people post. I gotta get back to work.

 

[House]

I don't think he has the wherewithal to see through a No-Lynch.

What's important is whether or not his push for a NL makes him Scum.

It doesn't, and isn't indicative of his alignment. Since voting for a No-Lynch isn't synonymous with being Scum, I don't really understand why you voted for him. If you would, I'd appreciate some sort of explanation on why he should be voted for that.

Disagree. NL denies info. to town. At the least it's anti-town, at the most it's scummy. Why do you keep defending House anyway Wake?

Non.

No-Lynching is a suitable tactic in very certain situations. The act of doing so, even in the early-game, isn't necessarily Scummy. It may be, WOlfie, that House is a Townie who still has a bit of inexperience. I mean, he's only been playing a few months know. It's been six years for me and I'm still learning subtleties as I go about my business.

In theory yes NL during the early game does deny Town information and isn't recommended for optimal play. The question is whether or not House deserves to be lynched over it and, to that, I must say no. Though if you wish to continue with it I'll abide it, but still question you here and there as you pursue that angle. Personally I think a more pressing matter is Arden's bit about her Role PM although, since we're still in RVS, anything silly goes.

As for me continuously defending House that indicates that there's been more than one occasion that I've done such. In fact regarding me questioning you for voting House for his NL attempt, I don't think that even qualifies as defending him, because in truth I'm more or less wondering over your intent here.

Do you think House has the wherewithal to push through a NL today? I don't.

Anti-Town =/= Scum, so I reason it's not always valid to try and lynch someone for Anti-Town behavior, whether bourne of inexperience or not.

A NL on D1 is bad play and hurts town. There is no town motivation for doing so. So I'm happy with my vote Wake.

You underestimate House at your own peril.

Arden's comment means nothing to me cuz it was in RVS stage and I already gave it the appropriate response. If she pushes it further, she will be lying and then I'll change my vote but for now, there's no reason to vote for her for a silly RVS vote.

My vote was also done during RVS. Why did you attribute my vote more gravity that Arden's, when hers was predicated on a lie and mine was an obvious non-starter?

Arden's was a silly RVS vote that means nothing. Your vote advocates a policy that can hurt town. Plus it gets us out of RVS by making a serious vote for a serious reason.

Voting Arden for lying about her role pm would have also ended rvs.

Can't buy this logic.

 

[Wolfsister77]

Disagree. NL denies info. to town. At the least it's anti-town, at the most it's scummy. Why do you keep defending House anyway Wake?

Non.

No-Lynching is a suitable tactic in very certain situations. The act of doing so, even in the early-game, isn't necessarily Scummy. It may be, WOlfie, that House is a Townie who still has a bit of inexperience. I mean, he's only been playing a few months know. It's been six years for me and I'm still learning subtleties as I go about my business.

In theory yes NL during the early game does deny Town information and isn't recommended for optimal play. The question is whether or not House deserves to be lynched over it and, to that, I must say no. Though if you wish to continue with it I'll abide it, but still question you here and there as you pursue that angle. Personally I think a more pressing matter is Arden's bit about her Role PM although, since we're still in RVS, anything silly goes.

As for me continuously defending House that indicates that there's been more than one occasion that I've done such. In fact regarding me questioning you for voting House for his NL attempt, I don't think that even qualifies as defending him, because in truth I'm more or less wondering over your intent here.

Do you think House has the wherewithal to push through a NL today? I don't.

Anti-Town =/= Scum, so I reason it's not always valid to try and lynch someone for Anti-Town behavior, whether bourne of inexperience or not.

A NL on D1 is bad play and hurts town. There is no town motivation for doing so. So I'm happy with my vote Wake.

You underestimate House at your own peril.

Arden's comment means nothing to me cuz it was in RVS stage and I already gave it the appropriate response. If she pushes it further, she will be lying and then I'll change my vote but for now, there's no reason to vote for her for a silly RVS vote.

My vote was also done during RVS. Why did you attribute my vote more gravity that Arden's, when hers was predicated on a lie and mine was an obvious non-starter?

Arden's was a silly RVS vote that means nothing. Your vote advocates a policy that can hurt town. Plus it gets us out of RVS by making a serious vote for a serious reason.

Voting Arden for lying about her role pm would have also ended rvs.

Can't buy this logic.

idgaf

Do you have reads on anyone else or I am I the sole object of your obsession?

 

[House]

You've moved from town to null.

Interesting.

Still taking inquisition personally, I see.

No, you aren't the only person I'm reading up on, but I have to start somewhere.

 

[Wolfsister77]

You've moved from town to null.

Interesting.

Still taking inquisition personally, I see.

No, you aren't the only person I'm reading up on, but I have to start somewhere.

Nope, Your case on me is shit and makes you scummier than you were before because scum have to fabricate scumreads on townies.

I'm moving on. Later I'll explain my vote on Wake better.

 

[House]

arden: Do you plan on scum hunting, or is all of your participation going to consist of active lurking?

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

VOTE COUNT 1.1​

House (2): CafeAuLait, Wake
Wolfsister77 (2): Arden, House
ScarletRage (1): Avatar4321
Arden (1): Moonglow
Wake (1): Wolfsister77


Not Voting: ScarletRage, Grandma, Shaitra, FA_Q2

With 11 alive, it takes 6 to lynch!
Deadline is 11/03/14, @ 8PM central.

• Do not talk about other ongoing games (whether or this site or others) in this game. That's a NONO and can be seen as a form of cheating.