In post 20, mykonian wrote:In post 18, herrcombs wrote:lolwut
I was just joking
but now that scumslip. This is actually interesting.
I'm clearly missing something. How is that a scum slip?
In post 20, mykonian wrote:In post 18, herrcombs wrote:lolwut
I was just joking
but now that scumslip. This is actually interesting.
In post 20, mykonian wrote:In post 18, herrcombs wrote:lolwut
I was just joking
but now that scumslip. This is actually interesting.
In post 169, herrcombs wrote:In post 144, Dierfire wrote:I think that the logic is very natural. I will break it down. Town players vote for those they believe to be Mafia. Mafia players vote for those they know to be Town (except when voting players they know to be Mafia, which is presumably less frequent). So, if I believe a player to be Town (such as DWL), others voting for that player are more likely to be Mafia than are others voting for some other player.
This is interesting logic, but something feels off to me about it, too. You say "players voting DWL are more likely to be Mafia." More likely than what? Than random? Using this logic with no supporting scumreads gives a probability marginally better than random to find scum. It's kinda like a really weak process of elimination, and it feels strange seeing it as the sole justification for a vote so early into the game.
In post 250, Dwlee99 wrote:UNVOTE:
VOTE: Lalendra
Never answered my questions. Says in 235 they'll make a more exstensive when their computer turns on yet it has been 13 hours since that post with no post. Should probably just FoS but idc.
In post 261, Haschel Cedricson wrote:
First off, assuming he's telling the truth it makes perfect sense to not specify a power role. Second, doesn't lynching anti-town instead of scum screw over the town by compunding things even more?
In post 261, Haschel Cedricson wrote:Also, I asked you which mykonian posts were full of crap and all of the posts you talked about were post 51 and earlier. Is there a reason for this?
In post 262, implosion wrote:In post 259, Lalendra wrote:as Hieirama pointed out, being blatantly anti-town is almost as bad as being scum.
Being anti-town may be "as bad as being scum" (although I'm not quite sure what that means) but that doesn't mean wasting a mislynch on someone you think is town (especially a power role) is going to further the town win condition.
In post 269, Garmr wrote:
This here is a extremely poor reason to vote me and a total misrep. It's pretty obvious I was going for a gambit with out saying my power role to get scum to shoot me also I never gave up on the game I just needed a little break to clear my head about things and read other peoples reactions. The way your potraying me here seems like a scummy excuse to vote someone and say they are town at the same time. Then you try and play it off as a policy lynch which you even said yourself you don't like doing.
In post 177, Garmr wrote:...I don't really care. My care factor for this game is zero.
In post 265, Dwlee99 wrote:UNVOTE: Lalendra
The list has arrived~
Back to Garmr for the reasons I was already on the wagon before I switched to Lalendra.
VOTE: Garmr
In post 293, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:
In post 209, Lalendra wrote:Really not a fan of the claim or the weird emotional outburst so early in the game. It's not that intense yet. I will wait and see what happens after his two-day hiatus though before I decide.
Well, that's an awful post.
In post 293, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:
In post 211, Lalendra wrote:I can post more. What would you like to discuss?
How about you read the thread and provide something off of your own back? This looks like scum asking for an angle to get into the game.
In post 66, Dierfire wrote:DWL is Town and easy to lynch. Players voting DWL are therefore more likely to be Mafia.
UNVOTE: BBT
VOTE: Keyser
In post 309, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:It sounds like you're undecided on Dier.
If we get a wagon forming on him, maybe you will have a chance to develop a better read?
In post 313, Felissan wrote:
PEdit:Lalendra wrote:I would still prefer to lynch Garmr but I would not be opposed to Dier as a compromise lynch, because yes, I am undecided and would be interested to see how he reacts.
Did I just read that right? I don't see how you would agree with a lynch on someone you don't have an opinion on...
In post 330, Dwlee99 wrote:I voted Lalendra to pressure them for their reads list. Unvoted when I liked their list but revoted upon learning they tried to pass it off as a policy lynch. I'm not seeing how that makes us an aligned pair.
In post 334, Haschel Cedricson wrote:
In post 315, Lalendra wrote:In post 313, Felissan wrote:
PEdit:Lalendra wrote:I would still prefer to lynch Garmr but I would not be opposed to Dier as a compromise lynch, because yes, I am undecided and would be interested to see how he reacts.
Did I just read that right? I don't see how you would agree with a lynch on someone you don't have an opinion on...
I want to put pressure on him to get information. Sorry I wasn't clear.
Then don't vote for him, pressure him.
In post 353, Dierfire wrote:The second sentence wasn't a joke--that part is true! Your vote typically doesn't stick, though.
In post 442, Garmr wrote:In post 441, mykonian wrote:Now that's an interesting kill. For one because I would have guessed someone else to go, for two because implosion was the odd man out of the obvtown group when considering his reads.
Reread a bit and you can disagree with me here, but I don't think implosion was killed for his suspicions. He kept his reads close and given that feli's slot is the one replaced, I don't think that person gets a major say in the NK straight away. He came back on his dier read and anyway that's a common one. I think someone saw a pr tell there or scum had other motives with their kill.
BBT, I want your opinion on this.
Curious why you say feli has a say in the night kill think this may be a slip
In post 464, Haschel Cedricson wrote:In post 463, Lalendra wrote:I think garmr and Dier were the scummiest on pistachios wagon.
Why?
In post 483, Haschel Cedricson wrote:In post 480, Lalendra wrote:In post 464, Haschel Cedricson wrote:In post 463, Lalendra wrote:I think garmr and Dier were the scummiest on pistachios wagon.
Why?
Read my ISO, I think I've been pretty clear about my cases for both of them.
So you mean they were the scummiest players who both happened to be on the wagon? Nobody's vote on the wagon is scummy in and of itself?
In post 500, Garmr wrote:lalendra is so fucking obvious scum this game town should neck themselves if they can't see it.
In post 524, Garmr wrote:
But if you meta every single one of my scum I have never ever fake claimed anything other than vanilla town and I don't plan to often.
In post 528, mykonian wrote:about your hier read lalendra, I think it's worth it to do some additional research. You could be right and she's newb scum, but it could also be a personality thing of someone who thinks the water in the pool is cold and keeps standing by the side. It's just a bit too blatant for it to be really scummy, I think scum has more incentive to avoid it. But then, I didn't put in that extra time to read some of hier's games yet
In post 562, Garmr wrote:If people look at my scum meta I should be like confirmed town at this point
In post 564, Garmr wrote:In post 563, herrcombs wrote:In post 561, Garmr wrote:Does it matter if my scum reads are on the same wagon if I have good reasons to scum read them?
You have not substantiated your scumread of me in the slightest, so I will continue to dispute this.
What about my other reads then?
In post 571, Garmr wrote:I like how lala doesn't even dispute my points against her and instead try to discredit me by using other things not related. She doesn't even bother.
In post 600, Garmr wrote:
Also I would like to bring up the fact that you slipped in saying you prefer to lynch your town policy read over your scum reads. You would rather lynch town than scum.
In post 605, Garmr wrote:In post 604, Dwlee99 wrote:I don't like how Garmr keeps telling us to meta him. It comes off as "I changed my playstyle look I'm not scum!!one1!!"
It irritates me people would accuse me of doing things a noob scum would do when I have never lost a scum game by town catching me (I had a sk kill me once when he was hunting town due to the fact he needed to keep towns focus on scum since scum had already taking a few hits at that stage.)
In post 620, Garmr wrote:In post 617, Lalendra wrote:In post 600, Garmr wrote:
Also I would like to bring up the fact that you slipped in saying you prefer to lynch your town policy read over your scum reads. You would rather lynch town than scum.
Sorry but I'm not seeing that in the posts you quoted here. Can you please point out specifically where I said that?
I'm really getting tired of explaining this, but I'll say it again - my read on you evolved. First it was a PL, then it was your blatantly terrible and anti-town play, then it was your responses to pressure and general attitude toward the game that made me feel that you were in fact scum.
well this ones easy
In post 312, Lalendra wrote:In post 309, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:It sounds like you're undecided on Dier.
If we get a wagon forming on him, maybe you will have a chance to develop a better read?
I would still prefer to lynch Garmr but I would not be opposed to Dier as a compromise lynch, because yes, I am undecided and would be interested to see how he reacts.
You said this when I was apparently a policy lynch lol.
In post 618, Lalendra wrote:In post 605, Garmr wrote:In post 604, Dwlee99 wrote:I don't like how Garmr keeps telling us to meta him. It comes off as "I changed my playstyle look I'm not scum!!one1!!"
It irritates me people would accuse me of doing things a noob scum would do when I have never lost a scum game by town catching me (I had a sk kill me once when he was hunting town due to the fact he needed to keep towns focus on scum since scum had already taking a few hits at that stage.)
There's always a first time, you can't use never having been caught as a reason why you're not scum THIS time.
another filler post by you.
No actual content today I see.
In post 654, Garmr wrote:In post 652, Lalendra wrote:Honestly I'm just getting frustrated at this point, Dier and garmr are so obvscum and no one is doing anything about it, and garmr keeps pushing the same points and beating the same dead horses. we deserve to lose this game if we're going to just let this happen.
Beating a dead horse would require making a actual case to why someone is scum.
In post 662, herrcombs wrote:Although I'm curious why she thinks Dier is so obvscum? I'm missing something obviously, because I can't see in her ISO where she has a single cohesive reason to think Dier is so blatantly scum.
In post 259, Lalendra wrote:But then along comes 171. What is the purpose of this post? Why say you’re a power role if you’re not willing to say what? Why claim when no one asked you to? Why so cryptic? And then you just give up on the game. Anti-town at best. Don’t play if you’re just going to totally screw your team by playing poorly and then giving up. I dislike PL but this is the wagon that I am most inclined to pursue at this point, because as Hieirama pointed out, being blatantly anti-town is almost as bad as being scum.
VOTE: Garmr
In post 280, Lalendra wrote:In post 177, Garmr wrote:...I don't really care. My care factor for this game is zero.
This. This right here. Yes you also said "maybe after a two-day break I'll feel better" but that's far from "I promise that after my two-day break I will return with decidedly pro-town activity and not continue to pork town in the rear end."
In post 498, Lalendra wrote:I am not at all liking the exchange between melter and garmr. Melter is making valid points, Garmr is making almost unintelligible responses that mostly consist of "NOPE YOUR WroNG LOL". I don't really feel as though melter is misrepresenting what went on with garmr d1, and his responses to melter's points have caused him to officially surpass dier as my top scum read atm. While I didn't have a problem with people voting pistachio per se, I didn't like the quick hammer; yes, there were other people who had declared ITH, which is precisely why you DON'T then hammer the person without saying anything. It was pretty clear that there was a reason that they were waiting to hammer him.
VOTE: garmr
In post 566, Lalendra wrote:In post 524, Garmr wrote:
But if you meta every single one of my scum I have never ever fake claimed anything other than vanilla town and I don't plan to often.
Often
OFTEN
GOOD GOD PEOPLE HOW IS HE NOT SCUM
In post 568, Lalendra wrote:In post 562, Garmr wrote:If people look at my scum meta I should be like confirmed town at this point
The fact that you keep pointing out how town your meta is makes me think that you are analyzing the crap out of it and only scum would need to do that.
In post 569, Lalendra wrote:In post 564, Garmr wrote:In post 563, herrcombs wrote:In post 561, Garmr wrote:Does it matter if my scum reads are on the same wagon if I have good reasons to scum read them?
You have not substantiated your scumread of me in the slightest, so I will continue to dispute this.
What about my other reads then?
Just not even going to dispute that, eh?
In post 618, Lalendra wrote:In post 605, Garmr wrote:In post 604, Dwlee99 wrote:I don't like how Garmr keeps telling us to meta him. It comes off as "I changed my playstyle look I'm not scum!!one1!!"
It irritates me people would accuse me of doing things a noob scum would do when I have never lost a scum game by town catching me (I had a sk kill me once when he was hunting town due to the fact he needed to keep towns focus on scum since scum had already taking a few hits at that stage.)
There's always a first time, you can't use never having been caught as a reason why you're not scum THIS time.
In post 678, herrcombs wrote:In post 677, Garmr wrote:2 There are no crumbs in her iso about her being a dr making the claim less believable.
This is seriously grasping at straws. How are you so sure there aren't any crumbs? And do you think it's necessary for town PRs to crumb their roles? Don't you think it's a terrible idea for a PR to have obvious crumbs, especially for a doc, because they could be easily noticed by scum for an early NK? Do you think it's impossible for scum to fakecrumb PRs?
Like wtf... why even make that argument...
In post 676, herrcombs wrote:@ Lala's 671: Why joke as a means of justifying a premature roleclaim? Isn't the proper time to claim when someone declares intent to hammer? Wagons can fall apart on their own at L-1... So wouldn't you want to wait as long as possible before you claimed?
In post 695, Garmr wrote:In post 694, Dwlee99 wrote:I don't understand Garmr's "crumb who you protect" thing. It seems kind of odd. Maybe the day after you save someone (like "this person is my number 1 town read") because they can't be scum if they got attacked and healed. But that argument makes no sense. And then this:
It seems like you're setting up for a lynch tomorrow because of WIFOM.
Or its basic common sense on this site. The only way a town doc would live is if they are useless so much it helps scum
In post 731, Dierfire wrote:@Lalendra
In post 723, Lalendra wrote:I reread Dierfire's ISO and I'm back to FOS'ing him. He asks a lot of questions of other people, but offers very little of his own opinions; it seems like he is just mostly fence-sitting, and offering very wishy-washy opinions, like he's trying to maintain distance from his reads in case he's wrong. I don't get the impression that it's just overly-cautious town play. I'd be comfortable with lynching him today.
This...sounds very fake. I wonder whether you could substantiate these claims further.
In post 738, Garmr wrote:bull fucking shit lale is town individually she has provided no reasoning at all day 1 showed she wanted to vote town over scum day 1 and her reasoning for her two top scum reads are not even there. There's plenty to point to scum.
In post 756, Meanmelter wrote:In post 724, Lalendra wrote:To be clear, I am still voting garmr. However if the Dier wagon picks up steam, I will gladly sheep the fk out of it, because I am happy lynching either.
I REALLY do not like that last statement. I understand you find Dier 'Obvscum' but I just dislike how it seems you are merely picking whichever door the most people are going into.
In post 801, herrcombs wrote:Fuck it. You're actually right -- a Lala lynch gives us a hell of a lot more information than a Haschel lynch.
In post 801, herrcombs wrote:We'd better be right about this, or else I'm flipping my desk.
In post 830, Garmr wrote:BACKING OFF SOMEONE BECAUSE THEY CLAIMED A ROLE WHEN THEY ARE ABOUT TO BE LYNCHED EVEN THROUGH THEY HAVE TWO DAYS OF STRONG EVIDENCE AGAINST THEM IS BAD PLAY BLUE JUST FUCKING TERRIBLE.
WOULD YOU PREFER A NO LYNCH
In post 831, mykonian wrote:so herr didn't want to vote a bulletproof, has no issue sitting behind a doc lynch.
this game.
In post 837, Garmr wrote:If lalendra isn't lynched today I'm replacing out then I'll come back end game and rub it in your faces she was scum.
Also yes I'm happy with my company on the wagon.
In post 849, Garmr wrote:no becuase you wouldn't vote what I wanted
In post 860, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:Yeah but, Lalendra has claimed Doc and so that's a really bad wagon.
Did Lalendra say who she protected night one?
In post 861, Garmr wrote:no she didn't she forgot that in her fake claim you think a doc would mention that.
In post 872, Dierfire wrote:I asked her and she said that she protected Mykonian.
In post 948, Garmr wrote:I'm trying to set up a situation that will get lale killed if she's town by scum or lynched as scum or forces scum to protect a town power role to keep lale alive if she's scum
In post 949, Garmr wrote:Basically I'm trying to force a scenario were she gets confirmed or forces her as scum to get lynched or forces scum to leave a confirmed town alive.
In post 992, Dwlee99 wrote:I don't understand why you would drop mason tells onto someone that wasn't mason, doesn't really make much sense, imo. I'm pretty sure it's just a strong town read.
In post 929, herrcombs wrote:Feeling better about Keyser being town. Myko can be town until I reread things to make sure, same with DWL. Not sure if the Dier hammer makes him town or if he's just trying to buy town points.
Uneasy about the NK, either scum is trying to WIFOM us or Lalendra is mafia. Not entirely sure why BBT was killed -- I have suspicions, but I want to reread to make sure first.
Who did you protect last night, Lalendra?
In post 1012, Dwlee99 wrote:Garmr, what are thoughts on lalendra now?
Lale, did you receive a roleblocked notification?