Mini 1159 - Powerrox93's Mini Normal I (Game Over)

[redtail896]

Hi everybody.

UNVOTE: until I've caught up. Won't be too long, I promise.

[redtail896]

Sorry for the delay. Internet issues + a 14 inning baseball game. I'm going to give my summary person by person here. I'm sorry for the length; I'm not normally this long-winded, but I feel the need to make up for lost time.

[L]: One of the primary wagons here. I can't possibly see why she found no logical reasons for the Jase wagon, and that seems very much to be an excuse after-the-fact; why wasn't she saying that to begin with? Comes up with an awful reason for her unvote (which was kind of out of the blue and w/o explanation anyway), and admits that she's not following her usual town meta. She doesn't really seem to do much actually (by her own admission). Overall, I feel like I just don't have enough information here to make an informed decision. I'll look at the anti-L cases in a bit more depth, but there might be bigger fish to fry.

Verdict: Slightly Leaning Mafia

andrew94: I just don't see what andrew has accomplished. He has what has already been noticed as the worst reasoning for voting Stefan, and beyond that is very centered on Jase for unclear reasons (or reasons that we've long since moved beyond). I see no real scumhunting here, and indeed little effort to give the appearance of scumhunting. Oh, and he's failed to respond to any of the comments about his Stefan vote.

Verdict: Leaning Mafia

crazypianist1116: Few posts, but I actually like what I see. Is willing to reconsider votes and suspicions, harps on andrew and stefan, is logical and willing to leap into a fray. I'd like to see more activity, but for now,

Verdict: Leaning Town

imaginality: Tends to stay with the safe wagons, but his reasoning is generally good. Nice tunnelling of Stefan, and helped to make a strong case. I want to see the promised examination of others.

Verdict: Leaning Town

Jase: Wow. Starts off so insanely scummy that I'm surprised a larger wagon never formed, and then turned around and became a fantastic player. Of his early play I'll say little, but there's quite a bit to glean from later stuff. There's a lot I could say, but as a form of summary I'll note that Post 168 was the moment I decided that he was closer to the town column.

Verdict: Leaning Town

Me=Weird: First to identify what he classifies as a Stefan scumslip, and tends (self-admittedly) to tunnel. I want his opinion of other people (he's really tunnelling), but I just don't find anything offensive here.

Verdict: Slightly Leaning Town

Mist7676: For starters, I completely disagree with her opinions on selfvoting; Stefan: you shouldn't selfvote. Beyond that, Mist is tunnelling Stefan, and barely contributing to that. Actually, I'm not clear on why you're voting for Stefan. My assumption is that you reposting imagin's case is an agreement, but you haven't really done any scumhunting yourself.

Verdict: Null

StefanB: Here we go. Weird unvote in Post #70. The real nail in the coffin for me is this post (#107):

Other strange thinks: Post 4 (first playerpost) were did the candyjoke come from? This sounds strange, wouldn't be a day later, but on Saturday it sounded strange.
BTW: The treads needs more Crazypianist und Zdenek(3 posts each) and of corse more GroupThink (a vote).
Uncle Pain: Sorry forgot to answer your question.

I did calm my anger. First I voted yabba to get a reaction, didn't like the reaction, so vote stayed.
I still think his gambit was a bad idea, and will be watching him. I would call him a slight townread, at the moment. Would like to watch him, when he isn't arguing with me, unfortunatly hasn't posted since nearly 2 days.

That description of his yabba vote sounds like revisionist history at best. Also, he's very much sitting on the fence here on the yabba issue, and I don't like that. He also misunderstands/represents the rhetorical question issue. I'm sympathetic to the "frustrated townie" view here, but overall my

Verdict:Leaning Mafia

tarsonisocelot: How has only yabbaguy jumped on TO? There is almost no content here. Just go read the ISO. Look at how much of TO's writing is fluff, unrelated, or small, unsubstantiated statements. All of her strongest statements are things that everybody will agree with anyway. Still has a vote on L, but I'm not sure I could tell you why. I encourage everybody to read this ISO (it won't take long).

Verdict: Leaning Mafia

Uncle Pain: Another poster that started weak (possibly to get a reaction), but clearly got better. I like a lot of his reasoning, particularly this:

Aw come on, what is this? First yabbaguy, then Jase, now [L]: you do a scummy mistake and later say “it was all planned to fish for reactions”. I’m sorry guys but this is just a tad too convenient. As much as I see that creating discussion is a valid townie move, I find baiting someone (or anyone) rather scummy because we townies don’t need to pull such tricks to find scum, plus it confuses town. The problem I see for myself here is that I don’t know how to evaluate this in terms of suspicion. I gotta admit that [L]’s trick looks the strangest. Not only because it looks the least planned and most retroactively justified of the three but also since she tried to particularly goad Surprise_Carcinogen. [L], do you have an actual case against him? As far as I see it, you dislike his statements about mafia theory and that’s it…

QFT. Really. The number of "act scummy then say later that I was looking for reactions" plays is absurd. Everybody needs to stop using that defense (you'll notice I consider it one of the big strikes against Stefan above). Overall: good reasoning and solid hunting.

Verdict: Leaning Town

yabbaguy: The original fake idiocy play, which went off rather well (in his eyes). I don't really like your player by player list in #151 though. I don't really see refutations of anti-Stefan cases, nor reasons that imagin is scum (it's not obvious to me that his case is "a bunch of nonsense") Other scum votes are very tentative. Jumps on TO, so it's unlikely that they are both scum (that would be a rather extreme bus). I'm unsure here; would be interested to hear others' thoughts.

Verdict: Null

Zdenek: I'd like to see more, but what I've seen has been good. Nice arguments concerning L (including what I think to be one of the best summaries of the case).

Verdict: Leaning Town

Whew, sorry that was so long.

TLDR: My scumreads are TO, Stefan, andrew, and [L]

Now, if we're going to stick with either Stefan or [L], I'll have more to say on that matter. However, I feel that a certain person has been sorely underinvestigated. So

VOTE: tarsonisocelot

[redtail896]

Me=Weird: You have said I am scum the whole game. So you know that really and we should say your are scum, because you are sure. Sorry Mod that I am so drastic: THIS IS BS, like a lot in the case against me. I am sorry that I was so unmotivated, will try to make an argument against every post in the game against me. And you should try to play like the good player you are and not like that.

RedTail: The point no one seems to get is what I expected from my yabbaguyquestion. It was neither answer 1 nor 2 but an interessting 3. Sure I have been that clear with that but any player just try to think a little.

Why does that mean M=W is scum? I just don't understand what your case is there.

As for the second point there, I understand what you're saying, but you must see that it looks very revisionist from over here. Reading the post in question, I find it hard to believe that that is what you meant at the time.

What exactly speaks against a frustrated townie in your opinion? yabbaguy seems to be very convinced of this theory.

It's the revisionism re: yabbaguy. That looks to me like a slip; he felt a need to justify a past action and jumped on an excuse already used multiple times in the thread. To me, that is not the mark of town.

Well, frankly, you've seen me play as scum. I am much....shall we say....different. My town approach is to analyze more... but this game started out so disgustingly that I haven't even done that. I'll be honest - I haven't been involved in the game the way I wanted to be. I'm frustrated. But I'm not giving up on the game because I'm the type to see things through to their end.

I'd recommend you read my past games. I'm more "townie" when I'm scum.

Please correct me if this is wrong: when you look scummy, you are town; when you look townie, you are scum. A is B and B is A. Seriously?! For someone being at L-2 you’re interestingly evasive, avoiding actual defence.

I'll go a step further and say that it seems outright contradictory. L says that as town he analyzes more, but as scum he is more townie. So when scum, he analyzes more?

My understanding of the first quote was that he was defending his scummy behavior by saying he was so disgusted w/ the game that he avoided his usual analysis. If that is correct, then the latter quote makes no sense.

[redtail896]

@redtail: You took it too far, your point is too far gone to be simple. I am simple. I still suspect your player spot.

FoS: redtail

I don't understand this. Can you clarify please? What exactly did I take too far? And why do you suspect my slot?

[redtail896]

I don't understand this. Can you clarify please? What exactly did I take too far? And why do you suspect my slot?

"wababa what the crap accusation, wait that's not clear, excuse me while I put on good Townie face and ask politely as possible 'Just why exactly, good madam, have you decided to accuse me on an otherwise perfectly fine day? Could you be bothered to explain the inner meanings of your grievances about me?'"

Criminey. Scummy scum Mcscum.

@redtail: You took it too far, your point is too far gone to be simple. I am simple. I still suspect your player spot.

I assume he's talking about me talking about his town/scum play. I genuinely don't understand what he means by "You took it too far, your point is too far gone to be simple." I asked for clarification. I see no problem here. If he suspects me, that's just dandy, but I'd like a reason.

[redtail896]

First three pages. At this point I was voting [L], and thought that SC and Jase were suspicious. Imaginality had started off higher on my scumlist but dropped down after a few posts. GroupThink seems to have only contributed a random bandwagon vote by this stage, I'll pay more attention to that slot this readthrough than I did originally. Next few pages of reread and response to any comments on this post to arrive within 24 hours barring catastrophe.

Why? Why were you voting L? Why were you suspicious of SC and Jase?

I'm harping on this because your latest post feels like exactly what I'm accusing you of. It's almost entirely summary and unrelated stuff; there's very little real analysis. You give us a couple of reads but no real reasoning behind them.

Simple question: why is your top scum prospect your top scum prospect?

Ninjaedit: Reading over your most recent post before hitting submit, I came across this line:

Imaginality's response to reactionfish is bad, looks at two not great arguments for people being suspicious pokes a couple of holes in them then agrees with them and votes for one.

Clearly this made you suspicious of Imaginality. Why did that change?

[redtail896]

Uncle Pain: Is there a particular reason you don't have a vote down?

[redtail896]

Oh...I miscounted the votes. I'm pretty amazing like that.

It happens.

@C-Worl: can you give us a more specific reason?

[redtail896]

Sorry for being away a bit. Exams killing me more than I thought.

C-Worl, why did you hammer? Jase clearly explained reasons that you shouldn't hammer. We have replacements catching up. We want to hear more of TO's thoughts. We have time. This isn't prolonging for the sake of prolonging, we have things we want to get done.

I know I shouldn't talk much in twilight, but I just wanted to say this real quick.

It's the fact the case is based on her being SK rather than scum that gets me.

We don't even know if we have an SK yet.

I think the fact you're SK-hunting already is a further indication of you being scum.

This is not how all of us, or even most of us, have been representing the case against TO.

[redtail896]

I know I shouldn't talk much in twilight, but I just wanted to say this real quick.

Rule #6 says you can. Why do you think that you can't.

Didn't say can't. Said shouldn't.

I was taught early on that talking during twilight was unhelpful to town. I don't want to get embroiled in a theory discussion, but suffice to say I hold to that view.

[redtail896]

VOTE: C-Worl

The hammer was scummy scummy scummy. There's no way around that. And his content beyond that is not fantastic (certainly not exceptionally townie).

If we agree not to lynch C-Worl for this, I'm still going back to TO, based on supreme IIoA and general lack of scumhunting.

[redtail896]

Was the hammer bad? Yeah, I admit I probably should have waited. But, I thought he was scum and figured waiting would have made the wagon stall and fall apart. I take full responisibility that my decision was bad and hurt town a lot but mislynching me, very quickly, won't help town.

The hammer was incredibly bad, as noted by multiple people. Jase's posts at the end of D1 give the best summary.

C-Worl is actually a VERY intriguing case - but I wonder if there's a case outside of "that hammer sucked", and yes, that hammer sucked. So he scum-tilts for me right now, but I still have to continue the sentiments that ocelot is continuing to blather.

Admittedly the hammer is the biggest thing, but there's more to it than that. Andrew was considered scummy by a good portion of us (little scumhunting, a couple of bizarre accusations, and general lack of real content). Also, C-Worl suffers from many of the same problems. As an example: tell me why C-Worl voted for [L].

[redtail896]

And then there's redtail - who I'm willing to gander is trying to slam that andrew wagon a bit too roughly. There was one post where it was all "to me" in a defensive sort of way - and I have a niggling suspicion that he's playing defensive against no perceptible threat.

I would very much like to see my "playing defensive against no perceptible threat.

Was the hammer bad? Yeah, I admit I probably should have waited. But, I thought he was scum and figured waiting would have made the wagon stall and fall apart. I take full responisibility that my decision was bad and hurt town a lot but mislynching me, very quickly, won't help town.

The hammer was incredibly bad, as noted by multiple people. Jase's posts at the end of D1 give the best summary.

You're quoting where I admit that the hammer was bad. You're arguing a point that I'm not arguing against. So, is Jase. However I AM TOWN. Lynching me won't help town out.

The way that first post was worded, it sounds like you're unsure just how bad the hammer was. You're trying to justify a scummy action with "I thought he was bad, so I chose the lesser of two evils." I'm unwilling to accept that, because it wasn't really the lesser of two evils. You hammered when it was bad for town. I'm glad that you accept that, but understand it.

C-Worl has not made a real defense against the hammer-case. I have no problem lynching.

Actually, properly scumhunt.

I am scum hunting. How do you not see that? It should be obvious who my top suspect is.

Can you give us some information based on D1 play as well?

[redtail896]

Uncle Pain: I have class in a few minutes, so I don't have time now to make a post of my current views/reasons, but I will do so before the end of Saturday. I'm not going to do a plain scummiest to towniest, because I feel that that allows you to avoid justifying most of your reads. As town that could lead to mistakes in some players placement, and as scum the benefits of being able to suspect someone without providing proper reasoning are obvious.[/quote]

The problem is that we aren't at all clear what your other suspicions are. It fells like you're looking for reasons to avoid giving us reads, and that's scummy. Your posts have mostly been IIoA and basic suspicion; nothing too in depth. That's why I (and others) are suspicious of you.

[redtail896]

Also don't like how TIO is paranoid about C-worl self-hammering, and not wanting a lynch because deadline isn't for a while. Would you want to wait for the last minute to lynch someone a cop got a guilty on?

This. In spades.

@crazypianist: any other thoughts? You've posted very little today.

[redtail896]

I apologize, but I must also be V/LA today and tomorrow (Sunday and Monday).

[redtail896]

redtail/SC: I didn't get anything much from SC. redtail started off by providing a post giving reads on all players with a couple of justifications for each, which is good but all the reads contined in it were decidedly safe. Next posts are made of questions, some useful others not. Gets defensive very easily.
I dislike this post:

VOTE: C-Worl

The hammer was scummy scummy scummy. There's no way around that. And his content beyond that is not fantastic (certainly not exceptionally townie).
If we agree not to lynch C-Worl for this, I'm still going back to TO, based on supreme IIoA and general lack of scumhunting.

And not because he wants to lynch me. It seems like an attempt to see how easily he could shift the wagon from his buddy onto someone else. Verdict: Leaning scum.

Having seen multiple people commenting on this post, let me explain. The attention was never to "give me an out" if the group decided C-Worl wasn't scummy. I clearly thought C-Worl was scummy. The purpose of that was to say that TO was next on my scumlist for reasons given.

Now, TO has mostly moved beyond those reasons. Thus, as others have also done, I'm inclined to move TO more towards the town side.