Invitational 10: 2005-2006. Game over! before 624

[MrBuddyLee]

Ok Elias, let's back up for a second. You're not contributing anymore because people are persecuting you. You feel persecuted because just when you started to participate, people started voting you for no reason--they didn't read your PBPAs:

My problem is that I was voted immediately without acknowledgement of what was in those posts.

I hadnt hoped to prove I was back in the game. I had hoped that I could at least convince people to give me a chance to post all I had before wagoning me. Clearly this was an unrealistic expectation.

This led me to believe that I wasnt getting back in the game regardless, thus my effort was cut short.

So you've created an excuse to give you a reason not to post any more today. Let's see if your "persecution" argument flies.

It's pretty clear to me they were listening and decided they found your PBPA cases suspect and decided to apply more pressure to you: pablito 616, chamber 618, me in 628, pablito in 629, elvis 640, chamber 648, patrick 686, Patrick 689, pablito 703, me 706, bluesoul 709, Huck 713.

Holy shit, man, that's a lot of people specifically commenting on your PBPAs. And the poll numbers don't look good--78% of respondents say your PBPAs are badly lacking. Only Ether's 656 clears you, but she doesn't indicate she's read your PBPA posts at all--so if anything, the people DEFENDING you are the ones not paying attention to your posts, lol.

And you even acknowledge your posts sucked, starting with your DGB case:

The reason I relied exclusively on DGB's words was essentially laziness. I was simply cutting corners, and for that I apologize.

Here's your elvis analysis:

Certainly some bad posts in there. The main problem I have with her now that I've read over her posts myself is that she really seems to ignore a lot of major issues. Then, she picks up on something small, and makes a large post about it. I guess this is essentially lurking in plain site. In addition, she was pretty noncommittal early in the game. However, once attention was focused on her, she was forced to post about the meat of the game. Though shes had some bad posts late game, she has defended some of the major points against her well and overall improved the quality of her posting. I find her fairly scummy, but less so than DGB. As to whether she is in my top 3, its hard to say as

I've only fully analized two players as thoroughly as I should.

Ok, so elvis is scummy because she:
1) ignores major issues
2) nitpicks
3) was noncommittal early
4) has improved since wagoned

I'm not saying you're wrong here, I'm just sayin your bullet points are pretty weak. Couldn't you cite some specific elvis posts or cases to argue why you find her "fairly scummy"?

Let's check another:

bluesoul: Basically reads as town to me.

Your bluesoul post says he's town, but in your subsequent reasoning paragraph you list off six negatives and zero positives about him. Hello, if you're going to make the statement, "reads like town" give some supporting examples. Instead, you gave six examples why you might find him suspicious. No wonder people are keeping their votes on you--your "cases" aren't the least bit convincing.

I'm going to come across like a dick here, but there's no two ways about it: you really don't enjoy scumhunting, do you, elias? You have just about no interest, and it shows, and I'll admit it does make it difficult to tell if you're scum because I'm getting the sense you would be equally indifferent as town.

My hypothesis is that you decided to stop posting because you were getting yourself in trouble with your half-assed posts, and you decided to stop posting as a survival tactic. Sadly, I could see you using that tactic as either scum or town.


Back on topic, you claim that because you're being persecuted and your PBPAs ignored, you won't post your thoughts anymore:

I'll come back day two and see if you guys feel like listening to my posts. Just answer me this: If my posts simply cause votes against me, why post them? If no one values my cases, why make them? It seems to me I'm better off just voting for who I find scummy in this game, and keeping my reasoining to myself.

Did I ever say in my last post that I stopped reading the game? Or that I had no more cases I could be posting? No. I never said that. I have other things I could post.

But theres no point.

I have just demonstrated above that you are full of shit. Almost everyone in this game has commented on your PBPAs and said they were significantly lacking or scummy. There goes your excuse for not posting your thoughts, so I suggest you get to it. Just throw them out there stream of consciousness. From memory--no more PBPAs. You say you "have other things you could post". Well post them from memory--we won't hold you to being exact, but we will hold you to that claim that you had "more cases".

If my posts simply cause votes against me, why post them?

Because you'll get better eventually. And for now, some of us may still be able to tell the difference between bad Elias scum and bad elias town. And maybe some of the votes on you are unsupported votes placed by scum and we'll spot them.

If no one values my cases, why make them?

Because if you come up town someday, we'll at least know your suspicions were sincere and perhaps follow them. And if you're scum you'll accidentally hand us your scumpartners as you make cases.

[elvis_knits]

I'm busy until the beginning of next week because of an art sale this weekend, so that's why I haven't been posting as much. I did feel like we were getting momentum back when CTD replaced into the game, and about half the players were posting regularly. Somehow we never have the full player list participating at any one time.

I still don't want to let go of my suspicions of Ether or CDB, but that is going nowhere and I think we have ot try to end this day.

Regarding Elias: I have only played with him once before and he was town. I know he has a reputation as awesomescum, but I was wondering if anyone knows what makes him so good as scum and what he does or does not do when he is scum. Which was a really long way of asking about his scum meta. Because I don't get such a scummy feel from him. The part that MBL quoted about Elias's read of me:

Here's your elvis analysis:

Certainly some bad posts in there. The main problem I have with her now that I've read over her posts myself is that she really seems to ignore a lot of major issues. Then, she picks up on something small, and makes a large post about it. I guess this is essentially lurking in plain site. In addition, she was pretty noncommittal early in the game. However, once attention was focused on her, she was forced to post about the meat of the game. Though shes had some bad posts late game, she has defended some of the major points against her well and overall improved the quality of her posting. I find her fairly scummy, but less so than DGB. As to whether she is in my top 3, its hard to say as I've only fully analized two players as thoroughly as I should.

Ok, so elvis is scummy because she:
1) ignores major issues
2) nitpicks
3) was noncommittal early
4) has improved since wagoned

I'm not saying you're wrong here, I'm just sayin your bullet points are pretty weak. Couldn't you cite some specific elvis posts or cases to argue why you find her "fairly scummy"?

Elias' read seems actually sort of fair. I've noticed that things that seem like tells or important issues to me sometimes seem nitpicky to others. And sometimes I think the "big issues" are too obvious to be scummy, or I don't pursue it because I see someone else is so I try to hunt for original clue not already stated. So, while I disagree with the assessment of me, I can see how someone would feel that way legitimately. Obviously a lot of the people in the game have had problems with me.

MBL, (and anyone else who wants to comment), what don't you like about Elias's assessment of me? Is it just that you think it's an example of a bad post? Is it a bad post because it's general/noncommital/says a lot of nothing? Or am I missing something?

[Elias_the_thief]

I lurked much of the game: this was mostly due to camp. The lurking I did afterward was far from damning.

I thought lurking by you was never damning; that you do it both as scum and town. Why would you imply that the lurking after camp was somehow less damning? Very defensive and inconsistent stance.

I didn't imply that. I was simply stating that it wasn't damning. I was only stating them as two seperate periods as I had an excuse for the first period of lurking and I assumed that no one would be attacking me for it. Thus I defended my second period of lurking as "far from damning". Thats not inconsistent at all, and defensiveness isnt a scumtell.

Further, were I scum, I could have easily lurked straight through to Day Two as

basically no one was pressuring me

.

As town, I don't really take note of whether or not people are "pressuring me" in this manner. It's the kind of thing I take note of and respond to more as scum. Interesting that you claim to be aware of who's pressuring you and when.

Because you and me totally have identical playstyles and tells. If you recall I dont know how to scumhunt properly. Obviously a tell for you is a tell for me, because we play town so similarly.

Also, I call bullshit:

Not liking how Elias is only starting to post content now that he's getting called on it.

I've been getting called for it since like page ten actually

. Read MBL's posts in isolation and you'll see that.

You've been aware all game that I've been pressuring you since page 10. Why lie to us about that now? Possibility: because you have to lie to make your case that as scum you could have just safely lurked through. But I wouldn't let you.

That wasnt a lie at all. I said BASICALLY no one. Do you know what basically means? It means that its almost no one. As in 1-2 people is within the realm of basically no one.

Also, you sure do have a lot of null-tells:

If you read any of my games, you'll find that I get angry on both sides of the game. Its really a null tell

I'm actually very weak as a scumhunter. Maybe not very helpful, but this shouldnt be a scumtell given my playstyle.

My lurking isnt based on alignment, its based on available times, number of games I'm in, and how interesting I find the game.

The following seems to tacitly admit you lurk strategically as scum:

Sure, past lurking can be used against me in cases if you really think its that much of a tell

Overall, I'd say you're pretty damned interested in telling us what's an elias tell and what's not. And you're pretty damned interested in us concluding that NOTHING is an elias tell--it's all null, baby.

Well I guess youre right. Next time I'm being attacked for something I do on both sides of the game I'll just say that I do it as scum and get it over with. How am I supposed to defend myself if not show how the tells against me are incorrect? If the null tell argument is valid (which it happens to be in those scenarios) should I NOT use it?

291 through 393 is just post after post of a disgraceful defeatist attitude. Then in 394 she(DGB) mysteriously turns it around, as if kicked in the shins. I believe this turnaround is motivated by the realization that she may perhaps not be the day one lynch. This is something that would motivate scum a lot more than town IMO. If she were town, you'd think she would have been posting those PBP's a lot sooner. This is one of the main reasons I find her scummy.

So one of the main reasons you find DGB scummy is because she behaves the same exact way you do? A disgraceful, defeatist attitude followed by PBPAs you would have posted much sooner if you were town?

Ha. Yeah. I was never a defeatist. I never self voted. I voted DGB for several reasons, as you know. The defeatist attitude was one of them. The difference between DGBs turnaround to start posting and mine is that hers was motivated by the discovery that she wasnt going to be lynched, while mine was a spontaneous decision to make a second effort in this game. Not a huge distinction, but its there.

Ok Elias, let's back up for a second. You're not contributing anymore because people are persecuting you. You feel persecuted because just when you started to participate, people started voting you for no reason--they didn't read your PBPAs:

My problem is that I was voted immediately without acknowledgement of what was in those posts.

I hadnt hoped to prove I was back in the game. I had hoped that I could at least convince people to give me a chance to post all I had before wagoning me. Clearly this was an unrealistic expectation.

This led me to believe that I wasnt getting back in the game regardless, thus my effort was cut short.

So you've created an excuse to give you a reason not to post any more today. Let's see if your "persecution" argument flies.

It's pretty clear to me they were listening and decided they found your PBPA cases suspect and decided to apply more pressure to you: pablito 616, chamber 618, me in 628, pablito in 629, elvis 640, chamber 648, patrick 686, Patrick 689, pablito 703, me 706, bluesoul 709, Huck 713.

Holy shit, man, that's a lot of people specifically commenting on your PBPAs. And the poll numbers don't look good--78% of respondents say your PBPAs are badly lacking. Only Ether's 656 clears you, but she doesn't indicate she's read your PBPA posts at all--so if anything, the people DEFENDING you are the ones not paying attention to your posts, lol.

I said what was IN the posts, not the posts themselves. My point was that most of posts that mentioned them never specifically address anything in the posts. That was my problem; I was being voted for the posts but for no specifics, leaving me with nothing to defend.

And you even acknowledge your posts sucked, starting with your DGB case:

The reason I relied exclusively on DGB's words was essentially laziness. I was simply cutting corners, and for that I apologize.

I acknowledged that one post was bad. And not that it was scummy.

Here's your elvis analysis:

Certainly some bad posts in there. The main problem I have with her now that I've read over her posts myself is that she really seems to ignore a lot of major issues. Then, she picks up on something small, and makes a large post about it. I guess this is essentially lurking in plain site. In addition, she was pretty noncommittal early in the game. However, once attention was focused on her, she was forced to post about the meat of the game. Though shes had some bad posts late game, she has defended some of the major points against her well and overall improved the quality of her posting. I find her fairly scummy, but less so than DGB. As to whether she is in my top 3, its hard to say as

I've only fully analized two players as thoroughly as I should.

Ok, so elvis is scummy because she:
1) ignores major issues
2) nitpicks
3) was noncommittal early
4) has improved since wagoned

I'm not saying you're wrong here, I'm just sayin your bullet points are pretty weak. Couldn't you cite some specific elvis posts or cases to argue why you find her "fairly scummy"?

Do you want me to? Any reason you couldntve requested this when I posted the case instead of voting without attacking anything specific within the post?

bluesoul: Basically reads as town to me.

Your bluesoul post says he's town, but in your subsequent reasoning paragraph you list off six negatives and zero positives about him. Hello, if you're going to make the statement, "reads like town" give some supporting examples. Instead, you gave six examples why you might find him suspicious. No wonder people are keeping their votes on you--your "cases" aren't the least bit convincing.

If you actually read my post you'd see that I did say that several of bluesouls posts were good ones (in the numbered section). The negative comments were things I considered weird. I said quite clearly that I had no reason to write them off as scummy. The "agreeing/disagreeing" comment was just an observation. I didnt call it scummy or protown. The only thing in that paragraph that I actually called scummy was the refusal to answer sarcs question. Try reading next time, my post doesnt contradict itself at all.

I'm going to come across like a dick here, but there's no two ways about it: you really don't enjoy scumhunting, do you, elias? You have just about no interest, and it shows, and I'll admit it does make it difficult to tell if you're scum because I'm getting the sense you would be equally indifferent as town.

No. I dont enjoy scumhunting. Sometimes I'm better at it, like when I actually start a game at the beginning. But I'm not gonna lie, when I come into a game with 30 pages to sift through without having been around for any of it, I really dont enjoy it. I know its my fault, I know it makes me a bad town player, but I lack motivation to do it. You've got me pegged.

My hypothesis is that you decided to stop posting because you were getting yourself in trouble with your half-assed posts, and you decided to stop posting as a survival tactic. Sadly, I could see you using that tactic as either scum or town.

It was to some extent to stop getting myself out of trouble. A game where I'm completely on the defensive without anything to defend against gets boring eventually. But no, mainly it was because I dont see the point of posting when no one actually addresses my post beyond acknowledging its existence and voting me for it.

Back on topic, you claim that because you're being persecuted and your PBPAs ignored, you won't post your thoughts anymore:

I'll come back day two and see if you guys feel like listening to my posts. Just answer me this: If my posts simply cause votes against me, why post them? If no one values my cases, why make them? It seems to me I'm better off just voting for who I find scummy in this game, and keeping my reasoining to myself.

Did I ever say in my last post that I stopped reading the game? Or that I had no more cases I could be posting? No. I never said that. I have other things I could post.

But theres no point.

I have just demonstrated above that you are full of shit. Almost everyone in this game has commented on your PBPAs and said they were significantly lacking or scummy. There goes your excuse for not posting your thoughts, so I suggest you get to it. Just throw them out there stream of consciousness.

No you havent. My point wasnt that no one commented on their existence, I knew that much seeing as I was being voted for them. No one gave me anything specific, or anything to defend against. That was my point about 285245245 years ago, you can see that at the bottom of the bluesoul pbp.

From memory--no more PBPAs. You say you "have other things you could post". Well post them from memory--we won't hold you to being exact, but we will hold you to that claim that you had "more cases".

I really dont see the point. I dont particularly care for further vague attacks and votes coupled with a vote for annoyance when I attempt to defend myself. Not to mention this day has been going on way to long. Talk to me tomorrow.

If my posts simply cause votes against me, why post them?

Because you'll get better eventually. And for now, some of us may still be able to tell the difference between bad Elias scum and bad elias town. And maybe some of the votes on you are unsupported votes placed by scum and we'll spot them.

You have my cases on the players that I felt the strongest about. Its not worth the stress, honestly. Talk to me tomorrow. Or lynch me. Its up to you.

If no one values my cases, why make them?

Because if you come up town someday, we'll at least know your suspicions were sincere and perhaps follow them. And if you're scum you'll accidentally hand us your scumpartners as you make cases.

Cool. I'll totally do that. Tomorrow.

I'm only responding to this post because its the first to give me any specifics on why I was being voted. Give me more like that, and maybe I wont retreat for weeks. Anyhow, I'm not posting anything else about my reads today. I'm doubting that I'd receive anything but more of the same, I dont want to deal with the stress, and this day has to end. That is all.

[MrBuddyLee]

The three points (ignores major issues, noncommital, nitpicky) aren't really things I see as universally scummy. Maybe if elias brought a few examples forth and explained why he found them scummy, the case would be more convincing. As it stands, he's just accusing you of being a bit of an odd bird.

Granted, when I misread you for a while (at least I think I did) I was finding your choice of focus odd. Getting on our cases for making scumpairings was odd to me. Obsessing about me "snipping quotes", SK speculation, supersaint speculation, it was all odd choice of focus to me.

Elias, is DGB the only person you see as pushing your case in a scummy manner? You seemed pretty ticked at the four people voting you, but never really suspicious of us.

[CrashTextDummie]

I reread Patrick, and I didn't really like what I saw.

He's certainly been consistent in his suspicion of DGB, but in restrospect, his detour onto the Elvis wagon seems somewhat off to me. Even as he was originally attacking DGB, he made a note that he didn't like the way or reason Elvis was attacking DGB, which on its own is fair enough. This was also part of the reason he switched to Elvis. Yet while he was on the Elvis wagon, he did a very similar thing casting doubt on HackerHuck's and CDB's reason for voting her, and it started smelling of a pattern to me. Preemtively casting a bad light on people on the same wagon as you smacks of preparing for the next day, and could indicate that Patrick was less interested in seeing his preferred lynch go through, and more interested in not looking bad (or as bad as others) when the lynch

did

go through.

So now he's gotten over his Elvis phase, and gone back to DGB. Consistent, as I said, but what else is there?

HackerHuck and Pablito he sees as borderline townish, Elvis doesn't seem scummy to him anymore, he's happy with me, and although it's been a while since he commented on MBL, he's always indicated a slight town read. Elias he's on the fence about, and he doesn't feel a bluesoul lynch. That leaves Chamber, who he's never really commented on and the two non-players.

He did mention that it's unusual for him to have so many people falling towards neutral or townie, and that he has fewer suspects. Few

er

? It looks to me like he has exactly

one

suspect, which doesn't seem natural after 35 pages of play any way I look at it. What's the matter, Pat?

[Elias_the_thief]

Elias, is DGB the only person you see as pushing your case in a scummy manner? You seemed pretty ticked at the four people voting you, but never really suspicious of us.

I'm still waiting for more extensive explanations of the votes from some of those people. I'm not suspicious of your vote because now that you have actually attacked specific things the vote makes sense. DGB's makes NO sense, has not been explained, and there hasnt been a good quality post from her in ages. At least I'm here and responding to posts, usually with more than a sentence. DGB is being even more useless than I have been, and being scummy to boot.

Pablitos reasons seem much more fluff than actual reasoning, and almost all on perceived nuances in the way I word my posts. This bit is especially troubling.

Elias, also, I don't remember excusing you from using some awkward language initially. But whatever reasons I once had, none of it distracts from a lot of the scummy behavior lately. I think what I said earlier was "I understand where you're coming from, but it doesn't mean I see you less scummy". I really think it's the way that Elias is making the town responsible for his need to post certain things and he's been so reactive and less directive. Also "more posts and increased effort" doesn't necessarily mean you'll help us find scum. So whatever I said before Elias, there's more being added.

He says he forgot his original reasons, and calls me out for "scummy behavior" without citing anything specific. His reasoning reads to me as someone trying to go with the flow on my wagon without reading my posts in depth.

"Starting discussion" in retrospect had little to do with voting you, you were pissing me off and I wasn't gonna miss you much if you happened to get dead. Your activity since then has been good but you want to know why I'm voting you now? DGB's not likely to get lynched so you're my second option, the wagon's decent sized, there's been good reactions to go by and, as I've been saying for a month or so, I'd still like to see someone safely dangling rather than get deadlined. In fact, DGB's sentiments are the same as mine, only she'd rather see e_k lynched but the wagon dissolved so you're her second choice. I don't believe you're any more blatantly scummy than our last two potential wagons, but at the moment I'd be inclined to call it a safe play, with the alternative being bird as I don't think he or Sarc have proven themselves either way yet.

This is actually kind of fair in my opinion. However, I think its fairly ridiculous that the wagon is still stronger on me than DGB when I'm actually willing to respond to posts against me while she isnt. She hasnt said anything over a sentence in weeks. I think now that its become clear that I'm willing to post at least fairly regularly at this point while DGB hasnt, that it doesnt make sense that bluesoul still thinks I'm the better lynch candidate.

So in conclusion: You and bluesoul seem to have legitimate reasons for voting me, though I think bluesouls is somewhat of a dated reason, and I think that date has passed. DGB's is pretty frickin scummy. You could say its a KIND OF similar sentiment to bluesouls, but that doesnt mean that DGBs isnt a whole deal scummier. Pablitos reason is scummy as it seems to be going with the flow rather than naming his own reasons.

[Elias_the_thief]

Elias, is DGB the only person you see as pushing your case in a scummy manner? You seemed pretty ticked at the four people voting you, but never really suspicious of us.

I'm still waiting for more extensive explanations of the votes from some of those people. I'm not suspicious of your vote because now that you have actually attacked specific things the vote makes sense. DGB's makes NO sense, has not been explained, and there hasnt been a good quality post from her in ages. At least I'm here and responding to posts, usually with more than a sentence. DGB is being even more useless than I have been, and being scummy to boot.

Pablitos reasons seem much more fluff than actual reasoning, and almost all on perceived nuances in the way I word my posts. This bit is especially troubling.

Elias, also, I don't remember excusing you from using some awkward language initially. But whatever reasons I once had, none of it distracts from a lot of the scummy behavior lately. I think what I said earlier was "I understand where you're coming from, but it doesn't mean I see you less scummy". I really think it's the way that Elias is making the town responsible for his need to post certain things and he's been so reactive and less directive. Also "more posts and increased effort" doesn't necessarily mean you'll help us find scum. So whatever I said before Elias, there's more being added.

Whatever reasons I once had? Sounds like he forgot his original reasons. He calls me out for "scummy behavior" without citing anything specific. His reasoning reads to me as someone trying to go with the flow on my wagon without reading my posts in depth.

"Starting discussion" in retrospect had little to do with voting you, you were pissing me off and I wasn't gonna miss you much if you happened to get dead. Your activity since then has been good but you want to know why I'm voting you now? DGB's not likely to get lynched so you're my second option, the wagon's decent sized, there's been good reactions to go by and, as I've been saying for a month or so, I'd still like to see someone safely dangling rather than get deadlined. In fact, DGB's sentiments are the same as mine, only she'd rather see e_k lynched but the wagon dissolved so you're her second choice. I don't believe you're any more blatantly scummy than our last two potential wagons, but at the moment I'd be inclined to call it a safe play, with the alternative being bird as I don't think he or Sarc have proven themselves either way yet.

This is actually kind of fair in my opinion. However, I think its fairly ridiculous that the wagon is still stronger on me than DGB when I'm actually willing to respond to posts against me while she isnt. She hasnt said anything over a sentence in weeks. I think now that its become clear that I'm willing to post at least fairly regularly at this point while DGB hasnt, that it doesnt make sense that bluesoul still thinks I'm the better lynch candidate.

So in conclusion: You and bluesoul seem to have legitimate reasons for voting me, though I think bluesouls is somewhat of a dated reason, and I think that date has passed. DGB's is pretty frickin scummy. You could say its a KIND OF similar sentiment to bluesouls, but that doesnt mean that DGBs isnt a whole deal scummier. Pablitos reason is scummy as it seems to be going with the flow rather than naming his own reasons.

[Elias_the_thief]

oops...

[Patrick]

He's certainly been consistent in his suspicion of DGB, but in restrospect, his detour onto the Elvis wagon seems somewhat off to me. Even as he was originally attacking DGB, he made a note that he didn't like the way or reason Elvis was attacking DGB, which on its own is fair enough. This was also part of the reason he switched to Elvis. Yet while he was on the Elvis wagon, he did a very similar thing casting doubt on HackerHuck's and CDB's reason for voting her, and it started smelling of a pattern to me. Preemtively casting a bad light on people on the same wagon as you smacks of preparing for the next day, and could indicate that Patrick was less interested in seeing his preferred lynch go through, and more interested in not looking bad (or as bad as others) when the lynch did go through.

I stated what I saw. If I see an issue with someone's reasoning, I'll point it out even if they're voting the same person as me, since I could obviously be wrong with my vote or I could be correct and they might be bussing. I don't really see why once is quite acceptable but twice suddenly makes it a pattern. Is there some specific problem with the observations I made?

He did mention that it's unusual for him to have so many people falling towards neutral or townie, and that he has fewer suspects. Fewer? It looks to me like he has exactly one suspect, which doesn't seem natural after 35 pages of play any way I look at it. What's the matter, Pat?

Well, I did actually say I'm reading elias as slightly scummy, so not exactly one suspect, no. I don't especially like having few suspects, but it happens from time to time, and I'm not unduly worried unless I start reading everyone as town or if it goes on for a significant stretch of time. Actually I'm surprised you're jumping on it only a couple of days after it's happened.

[CrashTextDummie]

I stated what I saw. If I see an issue with someone's reasoning, I'll point it out even if they're voting the same person as me, since I could obviously be wrong with my vote or I could be correct and they might be bussing. I don't really see why once is quite acceptable but twice suddenly makes it a pattern. Is there some specific problem with the observations I made?

The fact that you've been on two of three major wagons and added "buts" to both make it a

possible

pattern. There's no specific problem with the observations you've made, apart from the fact that they were all quite vague ("something about Elvis'/HackerHuck's/CDB's vote rubs me the wrong way" - paraphrased). If I'm right with this train of thought, it would fit with trying to cast doubt on fellow waggoners, but not enough to actually derail the wagon.

Well, I did actually say I'm reading elias as slightly scummy, so not exactly one suspect, no. I don't especially like having few suspects, but it happens from time to time, and I'm not unduly worried unless I start reading everyone as town or if it goes on for a significant stretch of time. Actually I'm surprised you're jumping on it only a couple of days after it's happened.

When you start a paragraph on someone with "I've looked at X again, and I just don't know what to think", I'd call that being on the fence. But fair enough again, you did say you found him slightly scummy. Which I guess makes you a weak supporter of the third major wagon of the game (or at least you're not entirely opposed to it).

And I'm jumping on it now because I reread you now. I asked you for a LoS, and you basically responded by stating that you didn't have any, so I felt the need to reread you and I stated as much. Just because I didn't "jump on it" immediately doesn't mean I didn't have any issues with it, I just didn't feel like pointing it out before re-evaluating you in general.

I guess part of the reason why I find it problematic that you only have one true suspect is that you were one of the more avid defenders of drawing connections as a viable scum-hunting technique (you even cited an MD thread you started on the matter). I agree with you, and it surprises me that you wouldn't be using it when you're obviously missing a bunch of scum. I've always thought of the the two of us as having rather similar play-styles, and it would bother the heck out of me if I ever had as few suspects as you have in this game right now. Outdated meta? Perhaps. You just being somewhat lazy in your scum-hunting? Perhaps. You being scum? Possible.

[MrBuddyLee]

I'm wondering how much of Elias's vaunted 10-1 record as scum is due to this same pattern:

* lurk while lazy town does nothing
* when called out, get indignant
* post some mediocre crap
* get really angry at anyone, after all, I'M POSTING NOW HOW DARE YOU
* back off and seem relatively reasonable
* refuse to do nothing further til the next day

Sadly, I think it's time to do some research. I would hate to lose to someone with that lame of a playstyle.

[Elias_the_thief]

I'm wondering how much of Elias's vaunted 10-1 record as scum is due to this same pattern:

* lurk while lazy town does nothing
* when called out, get indignant
* post some mediocre crap
* get really angry at anyone, after all, I'M POSTING NOW HOW DARE YOU
* back off and seem relatively reasonable
* refuse to do nothing further til the next day

Sadly, I think it's time to do some research. I would hate to lose to someone with that lame of a playstyle.

Occasionally. I'm not refusing to do anything, only refusing to post the rest of my PBPs as theyre irrelevant. And I'm certainly not refusing to lynch DGB. Thats doing something.

[Elias_the_thief]

anything should be capitalized to show that its not EVERYTHING that im refusing to do. that was vague.

[Patrick]

The fact that you've been on two of three major wagons and added "buts" to both make it a possible pattern. There's no specific problem with the observations you've made, apart from the fact that they were all quite vague ("something about Elvis'/HackerHuck's/CDB's vote rubs me the wrong way" - paraphrased).

I'll refresh your memory on these. Elvis's was the vaguest, I just didn't especially like her reasons for joining the DBG wagon and wondered if her last post or two before voting were designed to trip DGB up. My issue with HackerHuck wasn't vague at all, I pretty clearly said that I didn't like his biggest reason for voting elvis, and that his change of stance from "elvis is unlikely scum" to elvis number 1 suspect seemed out of proportion to me. And my issue with CDB was that he seemed to defer responsibility to other elvis attackers when voting her. (I realise you've said you were only parahprasing, I typed this bit because I don't think you paraphrased me at all).

And I'm jumping on it now because I reread you now. I asked you for a LoS, and you basically responded by stating that you didn't have any, so I felt the need to reread you and I stated as much. Just because I didn't "jump on it" immediately doesn't mean I didn't have any issues with it, I just didn't feel like pointing it out before re-evaluating you in general.

That's not what I meant. It's clear that I've had a good number of suspects for the vast majority of the game, usually like 3 or 4. That's why I find it odd that you're jumping me the minute I'm only down to 2, rather than seeing if it continues as a trend.

You just being somewhat lazy in your scum-hunting? Perhaps.

This annoys me. I spent 3 hours on friday reading and expecting to make a post, but couldn't draw any conclusions I was particularly happy with. I spent a further 3 hours reading and compiling on saturday, and even then felt only ok about where I was. There're several people in this game who have been lazy, and I'm not one of them. So you can stop this right now. And yes, you could stop using outdated meta as well.

[MrBuddyLee]

elias, please make a stronger case on DGB and I might bite. Your current case feels somewhat whimsical. I'm not sure you're 80% convinced she's scum.

[MrBuddyLee]

My gut has told me at various times that Patrick, bluesoul, elvis, Huck, Ether, chamber, CDB are town. ugh, I hate making blanket statements like that because each of them has done some scummy shit. But for some reason I feel like stating that.

That means our scum lie in:

DGB, elias, CTD, pablito.

The weird thing is, that implies that if DGB and elias aren't busing each other, then the scumteam is CTD+pablito+elias/DGB. It's much more likely I've been fooled by some clever bastard. Good job, asswipes.

[CrashTextDummie]

I'll refresh your memory on these. Elvis's was the vaguest, I just didn't especially like her reasons for joining the DBG wagon and wondered if her last post or two before voting were designed to trip DGB up. My issue with HackerHuck wasn't vague at all, I pretty clearly said that I didn't like his biggest reason for voting elvis, and that his change of stance from "elvis is unlikely scum" to elvis number 1 suspect seemed out of proportion to me. And my issue with CDB was that he seemed to defer responsibility to other elvis attackers when voting her. (I realise you've said you were only parahprasing, I typed this bit because I don't think you paraphrased me at all).

I read back again to check whether I was misrepresenting you here, and it seems that I was. I must have skimmed over your post 576, which contains your reasoning for the dislike of both HackerHuck's and CDB's votes. Mea culpa, it was late.

That's not what I meant. It's clear that I've had a good number of suspects for the vast majority of the game, usually like 3 or 4. That's why I find it odd that you're jumping me the minute I'm only down to 2, rather than seeing if it continues as a trend.

If that's not what you meant, why was your stated reason to be surprised that I was "jumping on it only a couple of days after it's happened"?

Either way, I still maintain that you were at 1 and a half at best at the time I "jumped" on you. And I still maintain that it's odd for you to get increasingly less suspicious of most players as the game went on without these suspicions getting replaced by others as more information got available.

Sure, I could have waited to see if it continues as a trend, but that's not really what I care about. What I care about is that at this particular moment in time, the game is at an impasse and in desperate need of momentum, and you didn't seem interested in giving it that momentum.

Why is it that people are only considering DGB or Elias for a lynch right now? A number of people have expressed that they just want this day to end (chamber, Elias, DGB come to mind), but they don't seem to realize that it's not going to happen unless they

work

towards ending the day. The way things currently stands, this game is going nowhere. The fact that you didn't investigate any other people as possible suspects in your analysis indicates to me that you could be scum encouraging this stand-still, in hopes that the town would settle for a sub-optimal lynch out of boredom or annoyance.

This annoys me. I spent 3 hours on friday reading and expecting to make a post, but couldn't draw any conclusions I was particularly happy with. I spent a further 3 hours reading and compiling on saturday, and even then felt only ok about where I was. There're several people in this game who have been lazy, and I'm not one of them. So you can stop this right now. And yes, you could stop using outdated meta as well.

It wasn't my intent to annoy you or to insult your effort, and I appologize if it came over like that. The fact of the matter is that you only have 1 true suspect, and I'm pretty sure there's more scum than that. "Lazy" might have been a poor choice of words, does "unambitious" (is that even a word?) or "lack-luster" work better for you to describe your current state of scum-hunting?

Either way, your answer makes me feel better about you. I maintain that despite me missing your reasonings to be unhappy with the HackerHuck/CDB votes, it could have been a scum-pattern, but I don't find it as likely as I did yesterday.

I'm gonna reread MBL next. His last post rubs me the wrong way, and I've let him slide lately while I investigated other people.

[pablito]

I just realized that DGB said she won't have access until the 11th. Therefore, my last vote does no good for now.

unvote, vote: Ether

[MrBuddyLee]

Bussing/distancing from DGB: Not a totally unreasonable accusation, but I'm simply not enough of an asshole to keep on someone just to act triumphant if they end up scum.

This is a weird thing for a townie to say. You were on DGB for about two months straight, so I guess you're saying that as scum you wouldn't be such a huge dick and bus your own partner for that long?

[MrBuddyLee]

chamber, if you had to pick out three townies, who would they be? i see you as a likely scum target tonight, so i'd like to hear that side of your opinions. (i know you suspect elvis and elias.)

do you have an opinion of pablito, patrick or ctd?

[MrBuddyLee]

Patrick, I know this is a pain to research and type out, so maybe you can do it off the top of your head. What's conflicting for you about pablito? The reason I ask is because I waver back and forth on pabs pretty much every time I read him.

[Patrick]

Patrick, I know this is a pain to research and type out, so maybe you can do it off the top of your head. What's conflicting for you about pablito? The reason I ask is because I waver back and forth on pabs pretty much every time I read him.

You can see my problem then. Purely off the top of my head: I obviously didn't like the play of his predecessor. PJ's thoughts didn't jive with mine as much as usual; I remember not really seeing his bluesoul vote or his DGB vote, and I didn't particularly like how he went about attacking me - he defended elvis with something that was only superficially true (I think it was about how he claimed elvis has given an "additional reason" to vote DGB rather than parotting him, when in fact she hadn't really). His points against me seemed nitpicky and he generally came off more as trying to win the argument than really feeling me out or trying to see where I was coming from. Enough about his play bothered me that I wasn't going to completely write off as "PJ is losing interest in mafia" though I did factor it in. Pablito gave me better vibes on replacing in, but to be fair always seems to give me very convoluted protown vibes even as scum. On review I liked his treatment of elvis - some little interrogation of her and the fact he picked up on her frustrated vibes. On the other side of the spectrum, I still don't get his case against Ether at all. If anything I seem to change my mind a little depending on whether I think of pablito or PJ, but CTD's meta-claim about PJ does make me feel a little better there.

[Patrick]

CTD, like I said, it just seemed odd that you'd jumped me immediately for having few suspects, as it struck me as more important as a trend type of thing. Your concern about today is valid, but I don't understand your assertion that I haven't looked into other possible suspects. I looked at CDB, as some people seem to think he'd make a good lynch, but didn't find anything especially damning. I looked at bluesoul, since he was coming under some scrutiny. I looked at your play to decide how I felt, because I never did much on either of your predecessors. I looked at elvis's case against MBL. I looked at elvis, a player who I've found suspicious for much of the game, and changed my mind. I looked at pablito, who I've had some suspicions of. I posted (or have recently posted) my thoughts on the majority of the players in the game. What do you mean exactly when you say I haven't looked into any possible suspects aside from DGB and elias?

[CrashTextDummie]

I seem to have trouble getting my points across, so I'm gonna try to explain myself better (and in more words).

You are suspicious of DGB, and less so of Elias. Assuming a 3-man scum-team, you're missing at least one. Do you think DGB and Elias are bussing each other? If no, you're missing another one. By "not looking into other possible suspects", I mean that you're seemingly not interested in digging deeper in an attempt to find out who you got wrong. Do you think the other scum is hiding among the inactives? Or chamber? Those are the only 3 people I believe you haven't mentioned in your latest analysis (or at least not in an analyzing capacity, you did adress Ether/CDB without passing judgment). The fact that you don't mention them tells me that you're not particularly interested in them.

And no, I don't think it's necessary to have at least 3 or more stated suspects at any given time. I don't even mind people pushing only one suspect. The reason I

do

mind in your case is that you eliminated everyone else from consideration in your latest analysis, which proves that there's clearly something wrong with the read you have on this game, and it doesn't seem to bother you. And it's a statement that you won't be supporting any other wagons in the near future.

The two people you are suspicious of happen to be the only two people that are anywhere close to being lynched right now. There has been little to no movement in either wagon, or in general, for a good while now. And people who try to get things moving elsewhere get little to no support. Hence, the game is at a stand-still. I think this benefits scum, and that's why I could see your play as a conscious scum-move to encourage this situation.

How do you think this day is going to end? Unless we get replacements that bring some serious life back into this game, I see either a no lynch by deadline, or people voting Elias or DGB out of annoyance or boredom as the most likely scenarios by far. I'm pretty sure Elias isn't scum, so lynching him would be bad for the town. I have to reread DGB, but she's certainly not the most likely scum candidate in my mind, so there's a decent chance that lynching her is bad for the town as well (alternatively if she's scum, I don't think scum would mind getting rid of her, thus wouldn't mind the current situation either way). I realize you disagree with this assessment, but this is the situation from my point of view. Do you understand now why I have a problem with the fact that you've narrowed your vision to those two people, and why I think you could be doing it out of a scummy motive?

[MrBuddyLee]

I'm pretty sure Elias isn't scum, so lynching him would be bad for the town.

This is pretty bold. I'll reread your posts to see if you've elaborated before, but if not, please do.