I'm just going to make some general notes now. I think any analysis is better than none.
Simenon's continued refusal to post his original tells on Jordan is rather scummy, especially since everyone's asking for it. This information isn't irrelevant, as he asserts. This is his original reason to suspect Jordan. If you take it away, all that Simmy's basically done is make a case in retrospect. That's bad stuffs.
Simenon wrote:So, I ask for those who are voting me for this- what exactly could I accomplish as scum by refusing to disclose my reasoning and what exactly is scummy about me doing so?
Isn't this exactly the kind of argument that made him think Jordan was scum?
I like Paradox's 118. His wording may be slightly off, but he gets the point.
Simenon wrote:My original reasoning is what we have argued about. I still like my vote for the rest of your posts.
No, we haven't, since you never posted it.
Simenon wrote:Starting a wagon on a townie is a nontell at worst, and at best an indication of someone being protown enough not to care about standing out.
Holy moly, this is so limited. You can't just say that starting a wagon on a townie is a null tell. There are way too many variables. You need to take into account the kind of player (there are a lot of players who don't give a rat's ass about starting wagons on townies, who, in fact, are expected to start wagons as their normal play style. But there are a lot of players who change their aggressiveness as they change alignments), you need to take into account his reasoning (bad reasoning=scummy), the timing (first wagon, counterwagon?), basically everything.
Again, I like Paradox's 131.
Regarding bandwagon discussion: this is a 7-player game, for Christ's sake. There aren't really any bandwagons in 7-player games. A bandwagon would equal a lynch.
I don't think Ripley's criticism of Paradox in 137 is warranted.
Eh, Aimee's 148 gives me bad vibes. Bad bad vibes.
Simenon finally explains in 154 and 157, I don't understand why he couldn't just reveal this earlier. I mean, it became irrelevant pretty early on. I think his reasoning is solid enough, though.
Simenon wrote:JordanA24 wrote:
Ah, that sorry was becasue we know eachother from another game, and I think he's a good player.
I felt you would make a response along those lines.
That's part of why I strayed away from just blurting it out. It's so easy to respond to, it really doesn't make much of an effect.
Would you (or, well, since Simmy's not around anymore, anyone) think that Simmy's tell was in any way credible, taking into account the fact that this was a likely answer? Or was this thought up after Simmy already voted Jordan?
Aimee's 164 is bad, again. Narrow-minded focus on Paradox. Paradox's 165 also has some good points against Aimee.
Ripley wrote:Still thinking things through, but at present I'm leaning towards Jordan as the best lynch. 2 experienced players - they could both be scum, obviously, but the odds are against it - think he made a slipup, which is better evidence than we have on anyone else.
This is pretty much the most blatant, scummy appeal to authority I have
ever
seen.
Ripley's 166 gives me bad vibes. "I'm not very confident" and "I don't really like this lynch, but I'm going to vote for it anyway" are things that scum say a lot. Aimee's 179 is very unimpressive. The only thing I can really distill from it is that Paradox is scummy. Good post by Patsy in 182. Funnily enough, similar points are raised by Simmy and Ripley in consecutive posts (183 and 184).
My vote, if I had to cast it now, would go to Aimee. I see Patsy as solid town. I'm not sure about Ripley or Simmy.
I will continue this post when I get home, which is in a couple of hours.
