13p Normal [TM2015]

[Thor665]

Vote: JasonT

I'm out of RVS now.

PEdit - and it pains me, because I want to vote the flashwagon - but I think JasonT actually looks worse.
That said, I'll agree with the core idea of voting anyone derp enough to random vote so...meh.
I think Jason i sprobably actually scum though - look at that post again.

[Thor665]

He OMGUSed but then unvoted the OMGUS as "not seriouse" in order to place...a random vote?
Something is screwy there.
My personal call is that he avoided the OMGUS because he thought it would look scummy and didn't want to look scummy. Ergo - he is worried more about looking scummy than going with initial reactions. Thus, he is scum.

[Thor665]

Oh yeah, I actually misread who was being speed wagoned there.
Eh, I'm good with the 'Sleepy is useless' case also, though it is spearheaded by a derp vote whom I would also be fine voting.
Mala and Egg were good voters.

@Save - what part of his actions is protected by the "sanctity" of RVS?

[Thor665]

@Save - what part of his actions is protected by the "sanctity" of RVS?

Well, since you said this:

though it is spearheaded by a derp vote whom I would also be fine voting.

I'm not convinced you understand what RVS is.

Maybe you have confidence to sort through random clutter and solve the game from one post, I don't and I certainly don't believe anyone can. I don't see Jason's antics as increasing the probability he is scum.

Why not?
And, again, how are they protected by the "sanctity" of RVS?
If RVS is truly a phase here nothing can be attacked - why even have it?

[Thor665]

Oh gawds, I'm going IC style on page 2. This wasn't what I signed up for.

I'm also not happy with SleepyKrew coming in and just saying "Greetings". That's not helping.

Are you freaking kidding me

Do you think it was helping?
His stance seems logical.

[Thor665]

::looked at STDs join date. Brain melts.::

[Thor665]

Thor:

Do you typically imply people are stupid when they have a different opinion than you?

Depends on their opinion - but, yes, people's thoughts tends to qualify my belief in how brilliant or silly I find them. I think...everyone does this?
Also, on a very broad scale - by definition people would tend to think people who disagree with them are dumb. People who think people that agree with them are dumb would be calling themselves dumb, which is kind of dumb.

I find this question kind of dumb.

I am not jumping on your wagon cuz I disagree with it. Does that make more sense?

That's different than your initial commentary of saying what he said was okay because "RVS".
Do you disagree with it for any particular reasons - or just "RVS".
Because if only "RVS" then, yeah, I think you need to defend that belief.

Thor, I hate to repeat the point I brought up in 40, but do you realize you completely ignored the post that answered your question 24 just so you could harp on the fact I used the "sanctity" without definition? Is your intent to libel me?

Your commentary there was so much on the fence that it didn't excite me.

But right now I do think Thor is maybe extremely trying to over justify things in his posts.

Okay - what conclusions do you draw from this thought, if any?
Clearly I'm not scummy, because you're not voting me.
So do you agree that your first post was questionable?

[Thor665]

But it is weird that two people just added their votes onto SleepyKrew, that is all.

So that does not fall under "sanctity" in your mind?
I repeat my need to understand sanctity.

[Thor665]

Apologies all, had a last minute thing pop up on me.

@Mod - V/LA till sometime Friday-ish April 4th

p. 3

[Thor665]

Thor, thoughts on the recent developments between Trojan and I?

You are townish (you are super townish to some of my backup, so that may be affecting my take there a bit)
Trojan is kind of meh to mild scum, but I'm not really sure if you're hard catching him. I could support his wagon if it became the biggest.

I am of the opinion that the town play in this game is bad or the scum play is great (or both) because I actually made a reads list as offered by myself and all my partners and it is pretty laughable. I'm currently voting someone who is being solid townread and I think that's a perfectly fine place to be at this second because...the hell?

Basically Egg, Sleepy, and Mala are the most "agreed upon" positions because they tend to favor null to town (I will admit to personal bias in my own Egg vote but, meh)
The scum reads are all over the place and are weak, ranging from Delta for faking looking town, to Micc for sheeping, to Trojan for...who the hell knows, and I have some town reads in that batch, myself.
So (in my usual humble fashion) I'm just deciding I like all the reads that agree with mine, and dislike the others and am leaving it at that for the moment.
I'm good with the Dragon push - His push on me fails to equate to scumplay as opposed to 'I dislike this guy' play which means he is looking for someone whom he thinks is lynchable rather than someone he thinks is scum.
I oppose the Mala push - though it's functionally still an RVS push at this stage.
I oppose the Egg push, the logic of 'he's avoiding scumhunting' by asking sthar8 for his thoughts is...well, that's actually the definition of scumhunting, methinks.
I'm neutral on the Boon push, and it's being done by my top scumread...meh.
I am good with the Delta push, split on the wagon, but groupmind basically dislikes him, basically. If it got big I could move to it happily.
I am fine with the Jason push and find the wagon to feel mostly good, I'm honestly kind of worried that it still remains the best wagon - I think we need a hammer intent and claim soon just to clarify ourselves on the wagons. Town is very disorganized right now. I will add in some personal theory work that the reason everything is so disjointed and there hasn't been a solid push on him is because either he is scum or the lynch is terrible, and I don't think this lynch looks terrible, do any of you?

Boon, Egg, and Mala do need to get votes into play yesterday though.
Seriously guys.

[Thor665]

Thor, am I wrong about STD and his reads though? Forget whether your team likes me or not, logic only here

No, I basically agree with your read on STD and his expressed opinions. I am pretty sure I expressed my own misgivings about them in my last post, and if I didn't I'll state that now - I find his case to be lacking in scumhunting and strong in lynchability hunting.

Now that I've said this - whassup?

[Thor665]

Delta push: Dragons pushing on Delta.

Dragons push: Delta pushing on Dragons.

You like both of those, Thor?

Yes, I do.

Please explain why there is any issue with that at all.

[Thor665]

Tell me more

Is my push on Delta scum on town? Is Delta's push on me scum on town? Do you think it's scum vs. scum?

Possibly, possibly, and possibly, though I find this one unlikely barring poor play.

Where is my push on Delta flawed? Where is it accurate? Do your teammates like my stuff or SK's post or perish vote? Which one is the push you speak of?

Which is the push you speak of?

You push on Delta has nothing to do with my read of either slot.
I find your push on him to be factually true-ish...but very poorly designed to actually show scum intent.

Where is Delta's push on me flawed?

I don't think it is and it appears to reasonably align with some of my stated issues with you.

What besides me calling you out for your play of "I'm going to adhom someone instead of scumhunt" makes me scum?

Nothing much. I think that's all I need as a scum case - it's pretty darn valid and also seems to have got you to sudden try to vote me - which looks scum reactionary rather than town deciding I'm right and voting me (illogical) or that I'm wrong and voting me (which hardly shows scum intent from me, since I'm not even voting you - making your case empty and weird)

All I know about your reads is basically that you think Jason is scum, you think a handful of people are town, and you're telling them to vote for hmmm...no one in particular.

Yes.

Town apparently sucks. Okay. That's wonderful. So you're not town then? What exactly are you doing besides championing a jason lynch that makes you so much better than everyone else?

I don't think I'm doing much that makes me better than anyone else other than pushing a wagon in a functional way and offering clear opinions.
Sadly, that is a bar that nt everyone is particularly choosing to leap above in this game - thus making my commentary hold far too much water for comfort.

Also for the love of god what makes you think I would think you're lynchable? I'm the oldest newb, ever and you're an IC, remember?

I fail to follow.

What does me attacking people who attack me have anything to do with picking lynchable targets if I were scum? Does that really sound like a winning strategy of picking lynchable targets as scum?

It makes more sense as a scum strategy than a town strategy - explain the town strategy and I'll work harder to explain the scum one beyond 'attacking people you think can be made to look bad'.

My explanation for scum makes a lot of sense.
What's yours for town?

[Thor665]

I don't think it is and it appears to reasonably align with some of my stated issues with you.

Examples other than my case against you, please.

Other than my evidence against you I do not have evidence against you - you are correct.

You can still answer the first question if you ignore my facetiousness.

So it was a handjob question.
Okay - well, in that case, it would take us back to my already stated commentary - that you think I'm lynchable because you think I'm disagreeable, and disagreeable players are able to be lynched off attitude over case.

Again I see a disconnect with "STD's a big noob" and "STD can successfully make me look bad"

I never claimed you would be able to do it.
I did claim that I think that's what you're trying to do.
There is a difference.

Do you really think that scum often successfully attack targets that attack them and bring that football down to a touchdown?

Yes.

No, I just made myself look really Smurfy cuz Delta attacked me and I reflexively voted him. Some team members are suspicious of you but no one's gone out and voted you, no one's been like "great show, STD."

I agree, you made a bad move if you're scum.
Does that make you town for some reason that I'm unaware of?

I'm having trouble understanding what makes you think you're so lynchable and why you thought someone could think that.

If you think I'm unlynchable - why are you voting me regardless of if you think I'm scum or not?
Answer: you don't think I'm unlynchable.
Thus - proving my point; you think I'm lynchable.

Now, what you're *really* trying to argue is how *easy* you think I would be to lynch, and how easy I think you think I would be easy to lynch.
But you're not arguing that.
You're trying to act like the lone hero againstthe big bad.
Hint: because it's a David and Goliath story - and you're trying to paint me as the bad guy to get me lynched off emotion and not case...which is what I'm claiming you're doing.
Any questions?

[Thor665]

Where is Delta's push on me flawed?

I don't think it is and it appears to reasonably align with some of my stated issues with you.

Examples other than my case against you, please.

Other than my evidence against you I do not have evidence against you - you are correct.

...so am I correct in saying you think that Delta's push on me isn't flawed, but only that parts where he attacks me for attacking you?

There is actually nothing in what you quoted that has me saying what you're concluding that I mean.

I don't think you are impossible to lynch. I don't really know if I can do it so easily even if I'm right about you.

I'm treating lynchable as "easy to be lynched," not a 100% absolute black and white, which is where we are disconnecting now.

No, where we're disconnecting is you saying that it's unreasonable for me to suggest that you believe I am lynchable. I see nothing in your actions to suggest I should have perceived otherwise - yet you're acting like I'm crazy sauce for thinking so. Feel free to define it as easy or as difficult as I wish - but address the actual point I'm making, which is not the definition, it is the concept I have presented.

I agree with a whole bunch of Thor's observations in #327, although I don't support the subsequent stuff on STDragons. To me STDragons' righteousness and indignation sounds more like town than scum.

Eh, let's see what Jason flips and then we can debate that. Nacho agrees with you though, so, meh.

Lastly: Jason, Oversoul wants to know if you spent any tokens for this game.

Team does not want to discuss token distribution that is all I am saying on this

[Thor665]

Eh, let's see what Jason flips and then we can debate that. Nacho agrees with you though, so, meh.

It is very interesting you are willing to push this without consideration to anything else and are determined to force this through

What do you think I need to be considering that I am not?

So, Thor, about that Delta push. Why is it not flawed, ignoring for now the part where he didn't like my push on you.

What do you find flawed and why?
I'm not going to go through his entire case and justify it as 'not flawed'. Justify it as flawed, or explain the flaws you see, and I'll be willing to explain why those issues don't bug me - but otherwise my answer is 'I find his case not flawed'. I don't see a flaw as part of it...so...?

Like you literally are saying that's what I'm arguing but not actually arguing it.

And I'm saying, no I am actually arguing that.

So if you agree that the only question is how easy I do or don't think you consider me to be to lynch...what is your issue?
I understand your issue if you think i think that you find me unlynchable - I don't get any issue if you think that I think you think I am lynchable...which you appear to now be agreeing to.
What's the beef if we both agree that you consider me lynchable and the only issue is "how easy" we suspect the other one thinks it would be?

Plain and simple I think you're scum trying to discredit me, trying to appear like some big damn hero right out of the gate

Okay?

When some guy tries to contest this or present a viewpoint contrary to your own, you proceed to attack them.

I agree, I hold beliefs and defend them.
So...I'm scum for that?
Or is this commentary as empty as it appears?

When confronted further, I find your answers to be suspect, I find your rebuttal to be dismissive

I agree, I am dismissive of your answers.

I don't actually care how lynchable or unlynchable you are, I'm pointing out that as scum I am, from my point of view, making things difficult for me. That's my opinion. If I'm right, woo, I'll take that as confirmation I'm not so dumb after all and if I'm wrong, whoops, guess I shouldn't get so distracted when someone insults me.

Yes, i agree that is the concept you are trying to sell to suggest you are not scum.
I am countering with the concept that I *don't* think you thought it would be this hard.
I understand that this is the question - what I don't get is how it makes me suspect for not believing that you are intentionally taking a hard path because you're town and/or wouldn't have been able to spot it as a hard path/are not likely to slip up as scum.

I suppose at some point I should just stop trying to argue towniness and just start thinking about how you've handled this conversation.

I agree with that - it would be a more townish response.

[Thor665]

Also, that response wall felt short - I note that a lot of the things I was dismissive about you dropped like a wet sack.
I think I was justified in being dismissive of them if you can't defend the points when I call them silly.
Feeling justified right now.

[Thor665]

What do you think I need to be considering that I am not?

Alternative options, you seem tunneled on me, and lynch me only.

What are these alternate options?
Are you just saying "other players" in general?
I am scumreading a few and mentioned them, but find you more or equally scummy and you also have a large wagon on you, I see no reason to back off from that read imply to pursue someone else because they're a 'different option'.

I'm clearly not understanding you.
Clarify?

[Thor665]

I concede I was dumb but only for attempting to try and talk to you

Our conversation is getting pedantic and neither of us are budging so I'm going to stop.

I have to admit that doesn't do much to convince me I was wrong on any of the points I raised.

As far as Delta I've provided many flaws to his arguments. He first mislabels a post and then claims it's supposed to be another post that's already labeled. That makes no Smurfing sense.

I agree, that shows sloppiness - but that isn't a flaw that invalidates his point. The point is weak, but it remains valid even with a misattribution. You did get kind of weird in your defense of the wagon and your reason for being there. I don't think that can be argued - and that was his claim. Sure, he got the post wrong...so what?

He spends most of his time just calling my arguments bullSmurf. He says I made up my reads and I pointed out where I did make my reads throughout the game. His argument is, multiple times, that I'm taking Smurf without much explanation.

That is not what he's saying. He *is* saying your reads are BullSmurf. He *is* saying your reads are badly justified. He is *not* saying that they lack explanation.
I do not find him not finding your opinions to be awesome to be a flaw - I share this belief with him, and have expressed it many times. No, I don't find this a flaw.

If that is your definition of flawless remind me never to buy a diamond from you.

Okay.

I am scumreading a few and mentioned them, but find you more or equally scummy and you also have a large wagon on you, I see no reason to back off from that read imply to pursue someone else because they're a 'different option'.

Alright, break it down for me, what exactly is your full case against me being scum

It's a few little things, really, but the concise description would be; overaware RVS, paired with lack of hunting, paired with sudden push on whom I perceive as the weakest player available to push in the game, paired with no actual argument for that case beyond playstyle, paired with the token thing.

That would basically hit all my niggles.

[Thor665]

Actually - toss in "Tammy not towning you already" as another one - but it's more tertiary but it is something in my head making me happy to stay on you.

[Thor665]

Everyone - we've currently got 6 'wagons' with one-vote each. We need to consolidate. (Preferably onto jason.)

Eh, actually with one giant leading wagon, really what I think we need is for Egg and Mala to find some grapefruits and get a vote into play - then at that point we can start considering the vanity wagons with actual ability to spot which are the vanity ones

[Thor665]

This is almost as bad as Fenchurch post I pointed out. Either I am lacking in hunting or pushing?

Sure?
Not sure what you're saying, really.

I am going after my scum reads, and who I think is scum. Not who I think is weakest.[/qote]
Question: who do you think is the weakest player here and why?

The token thing was decided by the team. Not overly bothered either way.

Refusing to discuss it tends to strongly suggest that at least one of you went scum though.

If you will read back my reasons for voting boon are more than just playstyle.

Like which?

What exactly was 'over aware RVS'

What I voted you for initially - the unvote and immediate reactions thereafter.

[Thor665]

This is almost as bad as Fenchurch post I pointed out. Either I am lacking in hunting or pushing?

Sure?
Not sure what you're saying, really.

I am going after my scum reads, and who I think is scum. Not who I think is weakest.

Question: who do you think is the weakest player here and why?

The token thing was decided by the team. Not overly bothered either way.

Refusing to discuss it tends to strongly suggest that at least one of you went scum though.

If you will read back my reasons for voting boon are more than just playstyle.

Like which?

What exactly was 'over aware RVS'

What I voted you for initially - the unvote and immediate reactions thereafter.

[Thor665]

What I voted you for initially - the unvote and immediate reactions thereafter.

I'll reply to the rest in the morning, but I actually didn't react at all to your vote or the reactions to it, I went about my business looking scum IMO. So I am curious to what you mean

I never said your reactions to my vote, I said your reactions.

well, one second you say I am lacking in scum hunting, the next I am pushing... which is it?

It is quite possible to be pushing someone without scumhunting them - notice that Pie literally just accussed me of the same. This is a pretty normal thing - why does it confuse you.
Also, why did you avoid my other questions?

I think in general, most of sthar's pushes have been rather weak. it feels like he's kind of poking at people here and there, but not actually doing anything that has town motivation.

You think he's actually poking anyone? I have him as active lurk.

the 2nd question. you're asking jason who he thinks the weakest player in the game is. what exactly is the point of this? how will jason answering *insert any answer here* tell you anything at all about his alignment? this doesn't have anything to do with what jason's angle actually is - which is that he is pushing people without regard to how weak or strong they are, not that he's going to magically avoid pushing a player just because he thinks they're weak.

He is claiming that he is not pushing someone he sees as weak.
All I'd like to know is who he sees as weaker than Boon.
If the answer is 'Boon' then I am curious at his issue with my statement.
If his answer is 'other than Boon' I'd just be mildly curious to hear why for info later.
I consider it quite valid to the attack he had about my attack on him.

re: 3rd question: why would scum jason need to be facetious about this? yes, it says one of the people may have went scum. OK. are you actually pushing this as a reason for thinking jason is scum? he would say that regardless of what his alignment in this game actually is.

He is clearly not being facetious about this - it was a choice of his team.
By extension logic, why refuse to claim town tokens? It does make a *lot* of sense to refuse to discuss tokens to protect scum token use - ergo, I submit this was a scummy action.
Also - it isn't and never was a question. I was stating a belief.

I don't understand what the point of the 4th question is either. first off, I think it's pretty apparent jason has reasons for Boon being scum that aren't based on playstyle

That's awesome, Jason does too.
Fenchurch agrees with me that he kind of doesn't.
I see no reason not to ask him to expound on his reasons that are not playstyle based in his own words.
I really see no reason to complain about asking him to do this. I mean, if you think he did do it...couldn't he just then answer me and be done with it? I don't get your boggle at all.

I don't see you actually asking jason about anything that's alignment-relevant here, or any of your other posts, really. none of what you're asking here adds anything to the game.

I disagree with you.

and yes, before anyone asks, I am more than aware of Thor's reputation for writing massive walls and getting into debates over specifics. I think Thor is scum specifically because of *what* he is asking about here.

Like what...specifically?
Just the above? Or something else?

first off, you're still calling jason scum for something he did in RVS on page Smurfing ......... 19? and there isn't a compelling reason it couldn't have been awkward-town instead of awkward-scum, either.

I see no connection between page number and scumminess and am unaware that something happening a long while ago makes it less scummy due to age.

Also, you agree it's awkward...so you do agree something odd happened, you just disagree on the alignment tell logic. Why? I find it quite likely to have alignment relevant info in awkward posts - I think that's about the best type of post to find alignment relative information because masks have slipped.

second off, this, again, betrays a contradictory mindset in your posts. these are your reasons for scum reading him. so,

WHY HAVE NONE OF THE QUESTIONS YOU'VE ASKED HIM THIS GAME HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THESE THINGS?

Well, first off - yes, I have had questions relative to those points. You even complained about some of them.
Second off - there isn't actually a rule that says all questions have to directly relate to tells. You ask questions to generate tells, sometimes you question tells, but you do not, by definition, question every tell you have.

and still have not explained specifically *why* you actually think jason's Boon push is bad.

I thought me calling out the 'playstyle' element made that pretty clear, honestly.

I would expect a town player to spend more effort specifically breaking down jason's posts here and asking questions that are directly relevant to what jason is actually doing, as opposed to this.

BUT THE POST I MADE BREAKING DOWN JASON'S POST AND SPECIFICALLY ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT IT IS THE LYNCHPIN OF YOUR CASE THAT YOU JUST MADE.

Whut?

the STD push is more of the same. Thor is asking a bunch of questions that don't serve to accomplish anything or are otherwise entirely irrelevant, without doing anything that actually has town motivation. his STD read at the end of all this is - as far as I can tell, because it's Smurfing impossible to tell exactly what he thinks is scummy here - essentially still that STD is scum because his push didn't actually point out anything scum indicative and was entirely playstyle, but again, he doesn't elaborate on specifically *why* STD's push is bad and most of the questions he asks read more like he's just commenting on stuff for the sake of it. ex, in 381 he starts going on a tangent on STD's DW read and it's tedious to read/follow because it's not relevant to anything, nor does it have anything to do with what the reasoning behind his read on STD actually is.

I agree - it is impossible to follow my cases if you give up on reading the posts.

[Thor665]

As for avoiding questions, I am trying to answer everything put to me, but being Easter holidays I am not able to reply to each and every post, I will get to them.. if you can repost them, that would be great as it will get my attention to them ASAP.

It is being shoveled at me with both hands, eh?

I never said your reactions to my vote, I said your reactions.

Actually, I would

insist

you expand on this other than 'reactions'

EVERY time its been brought up you just say reactions.

How did I react? what did you find wrong with how I reacted... what was scummy about it?

You tried hard to distance from the concept of RVS logic cases.
Have you ever stated this belief elsewhere in other games?

PEdit - all of that looks like playstyle to me.
Nacho agrees with me strongly on this one.

[Thor665]

PEdit - all of that looks like playstyle to me.
Nacho agrees with me strongly on this one.

it took you less than two minutes to read that? And get a response from Nacho?? I call BS.

Nacho agree with me that your case is playstyle based.
No, he didn't sudden speed read something I saw in a preview post - that doesn't prevent him from having assessed your case though.
You are literally quoting me playstyle based attacks and acting like they are somehow not. Are you serious that comments along the lines of "he's so terrible" somehow are *not* playstyle based? Because that's what you're handing me.

[Thor665]

Again, hi. Jason...My name is Boonskiies. I'm known to hammer my biggest town read on occasion without letting them claim in a moment's notice. Mainly when I'm town! Me OMGUS'ing is nothing.

Jesus god damn fucking christ... this guy is a fucking liability.

[Thor665]

But I'm sure that quote from you was *not* based on calling him scummy for playstyle.

[Thor665]

Boon is someone you do not want around late in the game, he has proven he is a liability and there is no town motive from him in anything he has said so far. Do not let him get anywhere near to an end game situation if you truely want town to win this game.

Or this. You are totally *NOT* calling him terrible here.
Totally.

[Thor665]

are you open to lynching sthar today?

Sure.

the obvious conclusion here is that his team has a mutual agreement to not discuss how they spent their tokens in *any* of their games. jason would respect this regardless of what his alignment in *this particular* game is.

which is why I think you actually using this as a reason for thinking he's scum is a load of shit

I agree with you - his team made he agreement.
Which of them do you think is using the scum tokens?
I will agree it doesn't make absolute proof of scum, even if they absolutely did spend them But that they are trying to hide the info to my mind proves they spent them, and thus it is a valid expectation that every member of their team has a higher than random chance to be scum (which, by definition, is what the tokens are)
And it's Day 1.
Blood. Blood makes the grass grow.

it feels like you're just going through the motions with all the questions you're asking and continuing to push him as scum regardless of what he answers.

Am I using all the answers to push him as scum?
Because if your answer to that is 'no' then all you're establishing is that I'm scumhunting him and am receiving answers I translate as 'null'.
Which, actually, seems normal to me.

Like what...specifically?
Just the above? Or something else?

most of your posts, really

Oh bullsmurf. That is so far and away from 'specifically' that it isn't even in the same language.

this is your stated reasoning for jason being scum:

It's a few little things, really, but the concise description would be; overaware RVS, paired with lack of hunting, paired with sudden push on whom I perceive as the weakest player available to push in the game, paired with no actual argument for that case beyond playstyle, paired with the token thing.

most of the questions you're asking him are in response to posts he made, but they don't have anything to do with your reasoning here for him being scum. taking the questions from your recent posts, you're asking him about whether he believes RVS

assessing his RVS shenanigans - which ar a major part of my case

, who he thinks the weakest player in the game is

assessing his defense attack on me when I questioned him about his non-scumhunting push on Boon

, pushing him for not answering how they used their tokens

assessing the token based aspect of my case on him

, why he thinks you should be looking at alternate options besides him

this one I agree isn't about the case - it's just making fun of his weak defense...in a *mild* way I could argue that his inability to even say 'Boon' showcases his lack of scumhunting, but I wouldn't actually wish to call that scummy and push it, really

, etc. (the post I quoted was only one example of this.)

Oh...wow, look at that, all of your examples are specifically connected to my reasons for finding him scummy.
...

I don't really have a problem with this. what I have a problem with is the fact that you have not asked him anything along the lines of:

- "why is Boon doing *insert action here* scummy, as opposed to playstyle?" (re: Boon case being playstyle - what you're doing is just assuming he's scum for pushing something you think is playstyle, without making any effort to understand what his thought process behind it is)
- "who are your other scum reads besides me?" (re: you not thinking he's scum hunting)

I agree - I don't ask questions the way you do.

the other problem I have is that, as I said before, I don't really see you taking in his answers and reevaluating. I have, to this point, seen absolutely 0 indication that you have seen anything he's said and thought he was less likely to be scum as a result of it.

I agree - otherwise I wouldn't still be voting him.

this isn't particularly scummy,

I also agree with this - so it worries me that it is your second point (of two).

Eh, let's see what Jason flips and then we can debate that. Nacho agrees with you though, so, meh.

I also don't buy that, if your strategy here was to sort him via pushing on him, that you'd make a post like this when you did. you pretty obviously are convinced he's scum at this point, while as I was saying in the last paragraph of the last post still haven't directly engaged him over what makes you think he's scum. this is why I don't think you're actually trying to sort him here

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand pressure, nor how Thor uses it, nor how Thor plays as scum or town.
But I'll agree with you - I am saying the things you're saying I'm saying.

i don't know why people think jason's posts on this/the previous page come from scum

i don't know why people think Thor cherry picking 2 posts where jason calls Boon terrible, while ignoring posts like 160/162 and 222 which have nothing to do with playstyle, comes from town

I flat out call 160 and 162 playstyle.
I would call 222 at best a challenge of OMGUS - which I'll agree is not playstyle, but also doesn't really grab me as a unique case either.

I oppose the Egg push, the logic of 'he's avoiding scumhunting' by asking sthar8 for his thoughts is...well, that's actually the definition of scumhunting, methinks.

Can you read in English? Egg never asked me for thoughts. He just announced that I was scum.

Yes...?
I would say a stated challenge like that is just as valid as a question in offering you the chance to present your counterargument.
Why do you disagree?

Let's try this:

Thor, let's say Jason got mod-confirmed as town, for some reason. Who would be your next scum candidate, and why?

STD for reasons stated.

Thor

:

Ceph would like to know if ffery is reading this game.

Ffrey is reading the game and has offered some thoughts as well.

I said his mentality of hammering town reads is a liability and I stand by that.

Who has motive to hammer someone coming across as town?

No one - including scum.
I agree it shows bad play - if that's your point.

It is not a play style attack, its an attack on actions I believe are scum and not of town.

If someone is willing to hammer someone coming across as town... that is scum right there.

No.
I can show you town doing it, multiple times, in the same game, all without any of them being Boon.

Players are dumb and play badly without it affecting their alignment.

[Thor665]

To clarify: if Boon *did* that in this game. I would happily lynch him.
I am not going to policy lynch him on the *idea* he could do that.

[Thor665]

Ffrey is reading the game and has offered some thoughts as well.

'The tooth fairy is reading the game and has offered some thoughts as well' is about as convincing as this statement btw.

I was asked, specifically, if Ffrey was reading the game.
I wasn't using it as an argument for or against anything.
What the hell is this derp?

[Thor665]

I can't get over how derp and scummy that Save The Dragons post is.

"Is Ffrey reading?
Yes.
That's not very convincing!
...bwuh?

Like, what is the magical convincing it's supposed to generate? I didn't claim it supported or attacked anything, but he attacked it anyway after *asking* me to state it.
I don't think he's reading, I think he's just attacking.

[Thor665]

Thor, I know you said it's a mild read, but can you explain why you lean scum on Trojan?

Mostly Nacho and Ffrey. Llamarble likes the slot and thinks he's team building...(?) but the other two find him a little shallow and empty. I agree with their takes. None of the reads are particularly strong but he feels opportunistic in a way to me, like he's drifting with the wind rather than planting and saying stuff - which I find extra strange in this format because, functionally, he should have lots of extra opinions being tossed at him. Makes it feel strategic.

Thor, what about Jason's token thing bothered you?

Basically that any non token talk equates to likely scum use of tokens - ergo; greater than random chance for scum from that team in any and all games they are part of.

So what the smurf is she saying? How the smurf should I know if she's reading the game if you're going to say yes or no and nothing more?

So when you said "that's not convincing" what you meant is "could you tell me some of her thoughts?"
Bollocks.
Here's one of her thoughts - she is actually town reading your slot.
I am convinced she is a fool because you are doing scum gak like this.

[Thor665]

Not buying this - you feel caught.

[Thor665]

but I was a little pissed off that I got a literal answer to the question; I honestly don't understand how you think I didn't want an explanation, or that Ceph didn't want further clarification unless your intent was to be obstructionist.

If I was to ask you - is your team reading this game with you?
You mean to tell me your answer would not be 'yes' but would instead be a listing of every thought they had offered?
Nah.

[Thor665]

"No. It doesn't prove malicious intent, but I don't know how you can sit there and feel like I or Ceph would be satisfied with that answer. That is my problem with it. Keep in mind I am still trying to read your alignment.

Yet you were made happy simply by me stating that she town read your slot?
If that's all you wanted why not ask for it?
If it's not all you wanted - why not clarify what you want?
You are literally complaining to me about how your question was poorly presented.

Thors arguments are flawed on many things, he seems to be all voice shouting for a lynch and being a cheerleader on the side championing wagons without doing too much himself.

Yup, besides offering reads and pushing them I am assuredly not doing much.
Wait...

He has a few times posted about forcing through the lynch or at least to the point of a claim. It does seem he wants to out roles partly.

This is true - I do wish to out some roles.

I am not fully convinced scum would be as obvious as this though. I keep asking myself would scum be this vocal in pushing a mislynch this early knowing they will get attention tomorrow.

I am conflicted on this.

You have played with me as scum and town - what are you talking about?

Because announcing 'I am likely to ignore anything you say' is not conducive to valuable discourse. Also the question 'tell me why you're not scum?' is of exceptionally limited utility. Also trying to get answers on specific positions by stating a poorly justified general conclusion is like trying to order soup by telling the waiter 'If you don't bring me food, I'm never coming here again'

It's the

least

valuable way to read someone, unless you have prior experience with their reactions.

Yet, somehow, it did generate discourse with you - didn't it? Which is the opposite of what you claimed he was doing.
I am not really following this issue.

If I was to tell you - you're scum
You mean to tell me your answer would not be 'no i'm not' but would instead be a listing of every thought you had offered?
...

Something is wrong here.

My answer would exactly be 'no' ...or 'that is a stupid question'.
Yours wouldn't?

Egg is still scum. Pie is still scum. I might compromise on Thor.

These reads are terrible.
Does your team sign off on them? (I will accept a yes/no answer...since, y'know, that's what I asked, crazy that)

[Thor665]

So your argument is "Ffery is townreading you while I'm not" gives me the same or barely any more info than "ffery is reading the game"

Seriously

I agree that looks silly - but you're the one claiming it as a stance. Not me.

Who are you townreading?

I have already openly indicated townreads on Micc, Egg, SK, and Mala. I don't really have any others to add that are really worth noting at this point. Eh, maybe with an arm twist Pie (against my thoughts, but most of my thread says that) and Fen (against my thread's thoughts, but I think that). Let's not call either of those particularly strong at this point.

Why?

It is quite clear that you're not following. He did not, at any point, contribute anything to the discussion that looked like he was trying to figure out my alignment. So to claim that me talking was the intended result of his post is silly.

Attacking someone to see how they react is *exactly* trying to figure out an alignment last I checked.
Do you not do this?

Yes, it totally would. So why should Egg be able to assume that just calling me scum is going to get me to interact? You're being inconsistent.

I don't think I am - because he didn't ask you that question nor couch it in those terms.
That said, since you agree with me about what a normal response would be - what's your take on STD?

Don't know, don't care. The heartless kids are focused on their games and ETL was asking for my thoughts on hers. Plus she's been sick and I've been moving, so not much in the PT.

I fully am aware of how useless ETL has been this last week or so.
Do you expect your heads to group scumhunt or not?

[Thor665]

Attacking someone to see how they react is *exactly* trying to figure out an alignment last I checked.
Do you not do this?

He had decided his position before I reacted. That's not the same thing.

I don't think all positions are set in stone.
Iliterally play the same way - I attack people, I challenge them, I call everything they do scummy - and I read the reactions that causes. Some flail, some stay cool, but through it all you get to see whatever their inner logic line is by challenging it and demanding answers. Lack of logic that can be followed favors scum.
Is this really the first time you've experienced this from anyone?
Do you never get "conclusions" before analysis from town?

He couched it in factual inaccuracy and nonspecific vagary. It's functionally the same thing.

I disagree, so this is a non-starter for me to see his approach as scummy.

As far as STD, I think he's genuinely frustrated and it's clearly coloring his responses.

Clearly - but frustration is a null tell.

He looks otherwise town.

Why?

Once I'm caught up on everyone else's games and everyone's recovered from the plague I'm sure they'll take a look in here, but I don't anticipate a lot of disagreement.

You and your team tend to think very alike then? Or you think you have eough pull to sway the rest of them regardless?

[Thor665]

Thor, you were asked if you are open to lynching sthar. A simple "sure" surprises me. You are voting the lead wagon, so I thought you'd say something along the lines of "People should be voting Jason if they want to compromise, not someone with zero votes. Why would I change MY vote?". Why are you open to doing that considering the current situation?

Because I'm open to it.. I would be fine with his lynch today. I would be fine with a lot of lynches today.
I didn't move my vote for a reason, however.

[Thor665]

I appreciate the counterwagon for analysis - but admit the jason wagon feels more just and real right now.

[Thor665]

(btw, protip: Nacho supposedly not realizing this is a large part of why I think Thor, as well as everyone else in that slot, is just BS'ing here. I am about 99% sure town Nacho should not be ignoring this - the only explanation, which I do find plausible so I want to hear an explanation first, is that he isn't engaged with this game and so hasn't read enough in depth. @THOR: do you have any update in response to 454?)

Nacho has not posted in the QT since I made him aware of your request.

[Thor665]

Well, I suppose there is a presumption he's reading to be 'aware' but he's been on site - so I do presume he's aware, just not responding.

[Thor665]

And going back and double checking - yes, i am presenting Nacho's reads correctly. He takes Jason's push as a playstyle based case and he (far moreso than I) even is townreading Boon - straight up.

Whattup pieface?

[Thor665]

I never claimed Nacho was scum reading him.
I claimed Nacho agreed with me that Jason was pushing a policy/playstyle based case.

[Thor665]

Going back and looking - Nacho apparently liked Jason's early "energy" basically. He called him active and townish.
That has slipped to a more moderate town read as the game has expanded, though he is disliking Jason's defense of his case as not playstyle based and agreed with me on that point when specifically asked.
He did indicate dislike of my current push, but also seemed to agree with me that there was very little consensus amongst the team as to who actually looks scum in this game - I even noted this information earlier when adhering t my push, because I argued that what the town needed was a claim or two and then a flip.

I thought you were asking him to look at the case again to re-verify that he thought it was playstyle based - and that's what I asked him to do (while mocking you for wasting or time as it is blatantly playstyle based).

[Thor665]

I was taking him agreeing with you saying his case on playstyle to mean he agreed with your scum read on him; that, and you appear to be factoring your team's reads into account already (or at least the town read on me).

I factor them in when we can ruddy agree on anything. It hasn't been happening a lot here.

Discussed it here;
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p6737273
Still stand by my value call on it.

[Thor665]

Nacho would be the townread mentioned.

[Thor665]

I still disagree the case is playstyle based - I'm half occupied with a HW assignment so I can't go through and explain it right at this second but I didn't think 160/162 were playstyle and you agreed the other post I brought up wasn't playstyle, among some other things. /shrug

If 160 and 162 were part of the three you brought up earlier - yes, those are straight up playstyle based issues.
I did agree that the OMGUS thing could be squinted at and called...well, a case based on OMGUS as scummy - but, frankly, i don't think OMGUS is that great to hinge a case on, and if that's your best example of 'not playstyle' then I think you and I have *MASSIVELY* different bars to leap over to make a case not playstyle based.

Nacho *didn't* have any kind of opinion on jason's reactions to you pushing him after that post was made?

After which post? The one I linked? No, his reads didn't particularly change except maybe to ease back slightly on the town read. Though he still holds it as of his last game update.

it's the exact same thing as the reaction to Boon he supposedly town read him for, but it doesn't look like he's factoring it in (his current approach leaving jason open as a potential scum read instead if he continues acting the way he's currently acting).

I don't follow this question, and it appears to be asking me to answer a value call for a read Nacho offered - all I can tell you is what Nacho offered to me.
I don't particularly like either read, myself, and have been ignoring both, if that makes you happy.

[Thor665]

OMGUS is not a case, regardless, and even if it is it fails to make the rest of the case non-playstyle and a negative reaction to a playstyle based case doesn't feel weird to me regardless.

I can say his reasons for townreading him remain the same as ever - as to the downgrade. Eh, I guess I'll add that to the ask.
Nacho is trying to override my read I flat out said as much - do you seriously think he has the level of sway and control to do so though? You seem to be basing the issue on the fact Nacho isn't controlling me.
That seems silly.
There is zero evidence to suggest that I would bend to Nacho's wishes - especially over a read based on "he has energy" especially in this game of all ruddy games. We needed a claim a week ago.

[Thor665]

Hell, and the only other wagon of any note is *also* a Nacho town read.
Let's see; if I went off just Nachos's reads I'd be lynching sthar, Fenchurch, Micc, and maybe Delta.
Two of those are amongst my top town reads.

Oh - shock - Nacho don't control gak.

Team mates are there for input and suggestions and advice. They are not there to play the game for me. I am using them as a sounding board - not a hydra.

[Thor665]

Are you playing like a hydra?

[Thor665]

you continue to handwave jason's angle as "OMGUS" when there is a lot more to it than that.

No - I continue to call the specific post in question 'OMGUS' and suggest that is not a valid case.
I *do* continue to handwave his overall case against Boon as playstyle - and have not seen you present anything to change that value call. Do not suggest I am summing up his case as OMGUS - I am not, not even close, I would not wish to argue that.

it's as I said. there is a distinction between OMGUS'ing someone, and objectively analyzing a push and finding issues with it. I doubt jason would have pushed Boon over it so strongly if he had stated jason was scum before he was actually prompted for a scum read, nor if he had any reasons for jason being scum that were particularly good.

I am not even disagreeing that it is OMGUS - I can agree it's OMGUS.
I don't think OMGUS is a good case - I see town OMGUS exactly like this all the ruddy time.
Bloody Jason OMGUSed me in this game - brilliant case against him that needs immediate respect? Nah.

if someone on my team has an exceedingly strong read on someone, especially a town read, then I would absolutely make use of it, yes. see: me thinking Mala might be scum but notsci being relatively sure she's town (even discounting RL factors).

So if you disagree with one of your team members - you'll take their value call over your own?
I do that if multiple teammates see it and I don't - but 1 v 1? I certainly wouldn't flip a read to their style.
Maybe this is just a really dramatic difference of opinion about how to play we have - I don't short shrift my thoughts as an active player versus my mates as outside readers. I think being in the swamp can maybe get you tunneled, but assuredly gives you sharper reads.

it amounts to Nacho missing something I would have expected him to see if he was town.

You'd expect him to see the policy push as not a policy push? That's silly.

Conclusions before analysis generally implies some addiional factor. It could be looking for reactions, but that wasn't borne out by egg's following posts. It could be a meta factor, but I've never played with egg before. My scenario fits better than any town motivation, so it's the one I'm going with.

I still don't believe that if I said to you 'You're scum because you OMGUSsed jason and I didn't like your fen vote and your STD position is the most popular in the thread' the expected response would be you listing all of your reads and positions.

I wouldn't expect that either, and I suspect neither would Egg - but neither of us claimed that, so you're strawmanning the position.
What both of us did imply was that you would react.
You did react.
Ergo: we are right.

Sure but where you're seeing 'caught scum' I'm seeing 'pissed at Thor'

No, we're both seeing pissed at Thor - but I'm reading into the way he's presenting being pissed and seeing scum motivation in what he's still doing.
You're seeing emotion and apparently declaring it town...for no discernible reason.

Not looking for an easy lynch, but trying to suss out motivations behind the posts. And he's been open with his thought process, even wrt you, and trying to cut the bias out of his reads. He's playing an uninformed game, and that means town. I do hate the boon vote, but I'm pretty solid on this read.

Your last sentence feels like it diminishes everything that came before.
So you agree he's not making a good vote (ergo - is using poor logic on some level) yet you think he's functionally scumhunting? So, you see evidence of fail and deduce it still equates to proper hunting...I don't follow. I see a scummy vote and see it as questionable.

[Thor665]

Thor isn't really scum but just an asshole.

Wow.
Check your mirror, pal - that's just being rude.

[Thor665]

Quote me calling you a dick or an asshole and I will happily apologize.
I will admit I called your play bad - that's part of the game. But there is a *light years* difference between saying someone is playing badly and someone is an asshole. If you can't figure that one out then I or you need to quit this game asap.
I'm not playing with someone who thinks they're the same.

Edit: if you didn't say it to be rude why did you say it? This seems nonsensical. You call people assholes *to be rude* that's what the word exists for.

[Thor665]

So maybe you're starting to convince me that maybe I do suck
So maybe yeah I have some choice words for you

The hell?

If I am pointing out that your play has issues FIX YOUR PLAY! I'm not an asshole for finding holes in other people's playstyles - I'm fugging helping by pointing it out!

[Thor665]

It doesn't even make sense.

"Someone said my play is bad...I think maybe they are right...so they're an asshole - brilliance!"
If you operate like that in the real world I am horrified.

[Thor665]

You could have even just gone with "Thor is rude" and at least it wouldn't have felt like you were attempting to piss me off. But you went straight for the hard insult.
You meant that crap.

[Thor665]

Did you even read that for context?

I read that you called me an asshole - did I get that part wrong?

[Thor665]

What else was in there? Ooooh, Thor is an asshole and I'm doubting my reads...as I vote him and call him an asshole.
Psssh.

[Thor665]

And it's based on a giant complaint that I find you scum WHILE NOT EVEN VOTING YOU.

Like, me SUSPECTING YOU creates such a total meltdown in your head that your only option is to flat out insult me...what the hell?
No - this is screwy as hell and I do understand you - I just don't understand you.

[Thor665]

this angle continues to be good, and

I don't know why people (THOR) are attempting to write this off as "playstyle" when it quite obviously is not.

the logic here is sound. Boon shouldn't have voted in the way that he did if he actually had jason as a scum read. there were other things that made me think Boon's post there came off as forced, ex. him saying "obviously" when he made no mention of jason being scum before this nor commented on any of the reasons for jason being scum - but either way, you usually don't wait until prompted to act on your scum reads.

the only reason I would not be writing this off as a scum tell is that it's Boon and I can see him playing in a chaotic enough way to just not think about it.

I feel like the bolded points are kind of relevant to each other - are they not?
I mean, *you* apparently understand that Boon's playstyle does this.
Jason either does not...or is lynching over playstyle, or both, yeah?

Nacho agree with me that your case is playstyle based.
No, he didn't sudden speed read something I saw in a preview post - that doesn't prevent him from having assessed your case though.
You are literally quoting me playstyle based attacks and acting like they are somehow not. Are you serious that

comments along the lines of "he's so terrible"

somehow are *not* playstyle based? Because that's what you're handing me.

If you believe any of the crap you are spewing, you're deluded. But then again your 'case' on me is pretty deluded too, so I would expect that from you. You're so hard on for my lynch you will distort anything to fit your deluded 'case'

I've quoted everything I have said on Boon, and if it took you less than 2 mins to respond, I call bullshit you even bothered to read it.

My posts against him are based on things he has done in game, most are quoted and responded to.

I never actually said he is terrible

...

And I challenge you to show me exactly where I said those words.

Go on, I bet you can not find them. Show me where I said he is terrible, because this is yet more bullshit you are throwing to buff your 'case'

this in particular I liked bc it takes a lot of balls to pull off the "I CHALLENGE YOU TO DO THIS" as scum. it reminds me of the kinds of posts I used to make as town a lot.

I added some bold of my own here.
Note that my initial stance was not (and never) you said these exact words.
Note that he "challenged" me to provide those *exact* words.
Note that I still provided quotes where, functionally, he was just calling Boon terrible (albeit, without using the word terrible he was *assuredly* calling him bad/terrible.a liability. et al)
And note that Jason never responded to that challenge.

It's a shell game - why are you buying this?
Seriously - this makes no sense to me, it was an obvious gamed play on Jason's part, and you're town reading it?
Look at it again, seriously.

if you go back through his ISO and cross reference this, what he is saying here is consistent. he is not pushing that Boon is scum for self-meta'ing. he is pushing that Boon is scum for explicitly *boasting about* his self-meta of hammering town reads and that this is not something he has done as town.

I agree that he has done this and will even agree that it is a non-playstyle based element of a meta case with one counter example based off Boon being scum for bringing up a game.
I don't think it means what Jason is telling me it means - and he assuredly coached it in liability language until after I started attacking him about it.

now, this obviously isn't a town tell. it makes as much sense coming from either town or scum. the reason I think this makes him town is that, when you look at it from this POV, his frustration and indignation the entire game makes a lot more sense. it's a town player who is annoyed at having to constantly repeat what he's saying, while not realizing what he's saying isn't actually clear.

I could buy that except for the skeevy stuff, like the aforementioned shell game. He feels annoyed, but it feels like 'I'mma caught!' annoyed more than 'why don't you get this!?!' annoyed. Like how he's complaining that I want claims? Do you actually think he buys that as a scumtell, much less a scumtell on me? Yet he keeps tossing it up as chaff to support his vote on me (as far as I'm aware it *is* his case on me). That feels like the same shallow no-hunt he's using on Boon. He finds something that "looks bad" and then pushes it without actually justifying the scum concept.

Like take his meta case on Boon. Okay, in one game Boon, as scum, brought up a game where, as town, Boon hammered a town read...okay...and he brought up that game here as well.
That's not actually much of a case. I *don't* believe Jason really made the connection of 'mentioning this game is a scum tell'. I don't buy that, especially since if you look at it in context, Jason attacked Boon for a sloppy and strange read (a read I think Boon did a good job of defending, honestly) and Boon also responded with a tongue in cheek toss up of 'here's how I play, I admit it's derpy, but...' and did so *after* offering an otherwise solid defense. Jason was already on him and already attacking him for weak reads and play when Boon did the 'scumtell' that you (and he) are wanting me to buy as a center of his issue. No, it was playstyle with the attached issue, but the commentary literally came up because his playstyle was being attacked (and, in my opinion, being unfairly attacked at that time)

My knowledge of current site meta is pretty much nonexistent (having not played for three years), so let me ask the group: is it common these days to use bodyguard in normal games? I'm guessing the answer is no...

Define common?

It is assuredly not 'Doc' or 'Cop' or even 'Tracker' or 'Vig'.
But I have certainly seen it off and on in games. I would call it a common uncommon role...? It's not likely, but its appearance wouldn't make me auto-doubt it. I will agree I think it's a safe scum claim role, as, literally all you need to justify is targeting someone who wasn't nightkilled each night and it's only hindered by trackers, and has logical built in excuses of roleblocking/redirecting. But I would not argue oddity as an issue with it beyond the 'unlikely counter' aspect.

[Thor665]

Oh, I suppose my unmoved vote makes my opinion clear (especially with me as the top counter) but I don't particularly buy the Jason claim.

[Thor665]

(And forgot this in my tabs;)

his role is a death sentence if scum. if jason happens to be alive on D4, then we can reconsider it, but this is one of those roles that naturally works itself out either way.

This is a mini, aren't you kind of self-defeating your own logic here? Day 4 might not even happen, and even if it does it's kind of a questionable time to then assess. The real suggestion is keeping him alive up until massclaim time/another defensive role, yeah?

And his claim is practically a defensive role soft hunt in addition to being protective if he's scum.

[Thor665]

The fact that after a protective claim, there has been 0 unvotes HEAVILY implies this wagon is scum driven and want to see it through. Town would, at least in some way be doubting their reads. In fact, it has made three people even more determined to see it through. (Thor, Horse and SK)

4 people on your wagon have voiced opinion on your claim without showing any doubts - by your definition that would make the scum team 4 people strong and all of them voting you.
I don't think your claim is as strong as you are implying here.

If you are town then, yeah, there is scum on you, I'd happily agree. I would also agree that they wouldn't particularly care to move their vote (or would jackrabbit instantly) and will agree that the 4 sitting on you are a potentially suspect set.
But this commentary is not actually analysis of what people are doing - it is fearmongering to avoid a lynch.

[Thor665]

Uf da!

[Thor665]

No, just this game, they're easy to confuse though.

[Thor665]

The real suggestion is keeping him alive up until massclaim time/another defensive role, yeah?

yes

and part of the reason you're scum is because town-you would realize how fucking basic this is instead of ignoring it

You're ignoring the more pertinent information I discussed with you to debate meaningless gak.

[Thor665]

Eh, whatevs.

@Mod - v/la till Wed 15th April

@Game - you all suck.

Claim: Hider

And I'll be protecting Jason if neither of us are lynched because, yeah, I don't like his claim.
If Jason is lynched then I'll hide behind STD because, frankly, if scum wants me and is happy to shoot him I suspect it helps town regardless.
I also loathe that this took so long and I have a derp speed wagon on me that sprung out of nowhere at the 11th hour that lacks a hammer intent prior to my work schedule going screwy *paired* with my total inability to describe the case on me beyond "Thor is a mean face! Wah!" Seriously.

Also; my wagon is comprised of three players I called scum long before they ever voted me; thus ends my wagon analysis.

[Thor665]

Thor, what roles are you trying to out, exactly?

You are either playing dumb, are scum, or both. I am not discussing that with you and if you really don't grok it click my wiki and "learn" abotu forcing claims as a scumhunting tool.